Byle Gowda Vs Krishna Murthy

THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06/07/2018, PASSED IN MVC NO.125/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXXIII ACMM., MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-5), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶25

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

Aggrieved by the order passed in MVC.No.125/2017 dated 06.07.2018 by the VIII Addl. Small Causes Judge and XXXIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation.

¶28

It is the specific case of the claimant that he had sustained injuries in the accident that had taken place on 09.05.2016, while he was proceeding as pillion rider. As per the evidence of the doctor, he had sustained 28% disability to the limb and 8% disability to the whole body. According to the claimant, he is earning an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month by working as a Coolie, the Tribunal had held that the accident had

¶29

3 -

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC:9435 MFA No. 9090 of 2018

¶31

taken place because of the rash and negligent driving of driver of the offending vehicle and when it comes to the compensation, the Tribunal had considered the income at Rs.7,000/- per month and granted loss of future earnings at Rs.94,000/- and towards loss of earnings during the laid up period, no amounts were granted and towards future medical expenses, an amount of Rs.10,000/- was granted. Under the head of pain and suffering an amount of Rs.25,000/- and towards loss of amenities, an amount of Rs.10,000/- was granted.

¶32

3. Basing on the evidence, the trial Court had granted

¶33

the compensation as per the table given below:

¶34

Sl. No.	Head of Compensation	Amount in Rs.
I.	Pecuniary Damages (Special Damages)
1.	Expenses relating to:
	a) To treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation (Rs.82,842/- rounded off Rs.83,000/-)	83,000/-
	b) Nourishing food and miscellaneous expenditure	15,000/-
2.	Loss of earnings which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising:

¶35

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9435 MFA No. 9090 of 2018

¶36

	a) Loss of earnings during period of treatment	-
	b) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability (Rs.7,000/-X12X14X8%= Rs.94,080/- rounded of Rs.94,000/-)	94,000/-
3.	Future medical expenses	10,000/-
II	NON-PECUNIARY DAMAGES (General Damages)
4.	Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries	25,000/-
5.	Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage)	10,000/-
6.	Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity)	-
	Total	2,37,000/-

¶37

4. Altogether the Tribunal had granted compensation

¶38

of an amount of Rs.2,37,000/-. Aggrieved thereby the appellant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation.

¶39

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/

¶40

claimant submits that the Tribunal had failed to grant a reasonable compensation for the injuries sustained by the claimant. It is submitted that when it is the case of the claimant that he is earning an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month, the Tribunal had taken the income of an amount of Rs.7,000/- per month. The accident is of the year 2016 and the income that is taken is on the lower side. Further, for the

¶41

5 -

¶42

NC: 2025:KHC:9435 MFA No. 9090 of 2018

¶43

disability he had sustained, under the head of pain and sufferings sufficient amount is not granted and towards loss of earnings during the laid up period, no amount is granted. It is submitted that even towards the loss of amenities also the Tribunal had not granted an appropriate amount.

¶44

Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 and 4/Insurance companies submits that the Tribunal had considered all the issues and rightly granted the compensation and there is no evidence before the Tribunal with regard to the income of the claimant. The Tribunal had rightly taken the income at Rs.7,000/- per month and there are no grounds to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Tribunal.

¶45

Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. There is no dispute as far as the liability of the insurance company is concerned. When it comes to the quantum of compensation, this Court had perused the material placed before this Court and the injuries that are sustained and the evidence of the doctor. The Tribunal had rightly considered the evidence of the doctor and taken the

¶46

6 -

¶47

NC: 2025:KHC:9435 MFA No. 9090 of 2018

¶48

disability at 8% to the whole body. When it comes to the income, according to the claimant, he is earning an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month. No doubt, there is no evidence on record to show how much is the income of the claimant, but considering the accident is of the year 2016 and as per the chart prepared by the Legal Services Authority for the year 2016, income is considered at Rs.9,500/- . Then, the loss of future income on account of permanent disability would come to an amount of Rs.1,27,680/- i.e., (9500X12×14×8/100) . Then, coming to the pain and sufferings, considering the disability he had sustained, the Tribunal had granted only an amount of Rs.25,000/- and on that count, it needs to be enhanced and this Court is granting an amount of Rs.40,000/-

¶49

towards pain and sufferings . Towards loss of amenities , considering the disability, an amount of Rs.10,000/- was granted and the same is enhanced to an amount of Rs.15,000/- . When it comes to the loss of income during the laid up period, no amount is granted. Considering the injuries, the nature of work he is doing and the disability that he had sustained, for two months, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.19,000/- towards loss of earnings during the laid up

¶50

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:9435 MFA No. 9090 of 2018

¶51

period . As far as the other heads are concerned, the Tribunal had rightly considered and granted the compensation.

¶52

In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.MEKALA vs. M. MALATHI AND ANOTHER¹ , the claimant is entitled for an amount of

¶53

Rs.10,000/- towards Legal Expenses .

¶54

The claimant is therefore, entitled to the

¶55

compensation under the following heads:

¶56

Sl. No.	Head of Compensation	Compensati on Awarded by Tribunal	Compensati on Awarded by this Court
I.	Pecuniary Damages (Special Damages)
1.	Expenses relating to:
	c) To treatment, hospitalization, medicines, transportation (Rs.82,842/- rounded off Rs.83,000/-)	83,000/-	83,000/-
	d) Nourishing food and miscellaneous expenditure	15,000/-	15,000/-
2.	Loss of earnings which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising:
	c) Loss of earnings during period of treatment	-	19,000/-

¶57

1 (2014) 11 SCC 178

¶58

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:9435 MFA No. 9090 of 2018

¶59

	d) Loss of future earnings on account of permanent disability (Rs.9,500/- X12X14X8/100= Rs.1,27,680/-)	94,000/-	1,27,680/-
3.	Future medical expenses	10,000/-	10,000/-
II	NON-PECUNIARY DAMAGES (General Damages)
4.	Damages for pain, suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries	25,000/-	40,000/-
5.	Loss of amenities (and/or loss of prospects of marriage)	10,000/-	15,000/-
6.	Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity)	-
7.	Legal Expenses	-	10,000/-
	Total	2,37,000/-	3,19,680/-

¶60

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimant is

¶61

partly allowed , enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.2,37,000/to Rs.3,19,680/- and the insurance

¶62

companies are liable to pay the compensation.

¶63

i) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

¶64

ii) The respondent Nos.2 and 4 - insurance companies shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the

¶65

9 -

¶66

NC: 2025:KHC:9435 MFA No. 9090 of 2018

¶67

claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security.

¶68

iii) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay.

¶69

iv) No costs.

¶70

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

¶71

closed.

¶72

SD/(LALITHA KANNEGANTI)

¶73

JUDGE

¶74

BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37

Byle Gowda v. Krishna Murthy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Byle Gowda v. Krishna Murthy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Nanjamma Vs Smt Mangalagowri

Smt. Sudhamani Vs Sri. Shivaraju

Sri. G Sambasiva Rao Vs Sri. T Jayaram

Sri.Basavarajappa Vs Sri.Anil Kumar.M

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs Smt. Rajalakshmi. N

Mohammed Vs the Divisional Controller