Sri Muniyappa Vs the Manager

SRI MUNIYAPPA, S/O. KANNAN, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT NO.943, RAGIGUDDA SLUM, J.P.NAGAR, 28TH MAIN, NEAR BDA, BENGALURU 78. AS PER VOTER ID ADDRESS: NO.262, KSRTC SLUM, J.P.NAGAR, 2^ND PHASE BENGALURU-78.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

(BY SRI. K.S.ANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. GIRISHA H.M., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

THE MANAGER

¶15

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD, 5TH AND 6TH FLOOR, KRUSHI BHAVAN BUILDING, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001.

¶16

MR. SHAMEER S/O. IBRAHIM, MAJOR, NO.05/317, OTTAYATH HOUSE, CHERUKARA POST,

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:15286 MFA No. 1629 of 2019

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

PERINTHALMANNA, MALLAPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA STATE.

¶21

MR. HARI S/O. GOPALAN NAIR, MAJOR, R/AT KAMAPURATH HOUSE, POOLAMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA STATE.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT. MANJULA N. TEJASWI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 19.01.2024;

¶24

NOTICE TO R3 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)

¶25

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.11.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.3865/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, M.A.C.T., BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-14), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶26

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

This appeal is filed by the injured/appellant seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 02.11.2018 passed in MVC No.3865/2017 by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru, (for short, ‘Tribunal’).

¶30

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:15286 MFA No. 1629 of 2019

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the

¶33

consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

¶34

Sri.K.S.Ananda, learned counsel for Sri.Girisha.H.M, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal committed a grave error in coming to conclusion that the injured/appellant was negligent and contributed to the accident to the extent of 15%, the said finding by the Tribunal is without any evidence. It is submitted that the Tribunal committed a grave error in assessing the income, disability of the injured and award of compensation on all other heads on the lower side. Hence, he seeks to re-assess the compensation appropriately by allowing the appeal.

¶35

Per Contra, Smt.Manjula N.Tejaswi, learned counsel for respondent No.1 supports the impugned judgment and award by the Tribunal and submits that the Tribunal has accorded reasons at paragraph No.11 and those reasons are based on the evidence available before the Tribunal which needs no modification. It is submitted that the appellant has not produced any proof of income, the income of the injured is

¶36

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:15286 MFA No. 1629 of 2019

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

required to be assessed notionally and the disability is assessed at 10% by considering the nature of injury suffered by the appellant which does not call for any interference and the award is just and fair compensation to the injured claimant, which does not call for any enhancement. Hence, she seeks to dismiss the appeal.

¶39

I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and meticulously perused the material available on record including the Tribunal records.

¶40

It is to be noticed that the appellant met with a road accident on 30.05.2017. It is not in dispute that the jurisdictional police after investigation filed a charge sheet against the rider of the offending motor cycle. In order to prove the negligence, the appellant examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.13 and he has also examined P.W.2Dr.Chidanand to prove the disability. The respondents have not adduced the evidence before the Tribunal. The Tribunal has recorded the finding that the rider of the scooter bearing registration No.KA-05-JP-7372 has also contributed the accident to some extent. In my considered view, the same

¶41

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:15286 MFA No. 1629 of 2019

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

finding is on an imaginary basis and without any evidence before the Court. Admittedly, Ex.P.6-charge sheet is filed against the rider of the offending Bullet motor cycle bearing registration No.KL-10-AL-7918 which is insured to the respondent No.1 and there is no independent evidence available on record to come to such a conclusion that the appellant has contributed negligence in the accident to the extent of 15%. In the absence of any evidence, in my view, the finding of the Tribunal with regard to the contributory negligence required to be set-aside and accordingly, the same is set-aside.

¶44

Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the appellant claimed that he was working as coolie and used to earn Rs.800/-, however no evidence was placed before the Tribunal. In the absence of the evidence, this Court re-assessess the income of the injured notionally at Rs.11,000/- per month placing reliance on the chart prepared by the KSLSA. The Tribunal taking note of the injury suffered and the assessment of disability by P.W.2 has assessed the disability to the extent of 10% which does not call for any modification. Having re-assessed the income and finding on the

¶45

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:15286 MFA No. 1629 of 2019

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

contributory negligence and taking note of the fact that the appellant was inpatient for a period of 10 days in the hospital,

¶48

compensation is re-assessed as under:

¶49

HEADS	AMOUNT (in Rs.)
Pain & suffering	Rs.40,000/-
Food and Nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges	Rs.15,000/-
Medical expenses	Rs.7,000/-
Loss of income duringlaid up period	Rs.33,000/-
Loss of future earnings due to disability (11,000 x 12 x 17 x 10%)	Rs.2,24,400/-
Loss of amenities	Rs.40,000/-
Loss of Future Medical expenses	Rs.15,000/-
Total	Rs.3,74,400/-

¶50

In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the

¶51

following:

¶52

ORDER

¶53

a) Appeal is allowed in part .

¶54

b) The impugned judgment and award dated 02.11.2018 passed by the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the appellantclaimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.3,74,400/- as against Rs.2,37,320/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶55

7 -

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:15286 MFA No. 1629 of 2019

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

c) The enhanced compensation shall carry at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.

¶59

d) The respondent No.1 shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.

¶60

e) The rest of the judgment and award of the Tribunal with respect to apportionment, deposit and release shall remain unaltered.

¶61

f) Draw modified award accordingly.

¶62

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

¶63

RHS

¶64

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Sri Muniyappa v. the Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Muniyappa v. the Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Vs Manjegowda

M/S Teknopoint Trading Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs Smt P Anitha

Mr Sukumara Vs Mr Safiq Sahil

Chethan Kumar H N Vs Suresh Kumar H N

Marulamma Vs Punith B

B.Shantharaju Vs the Divisional Controller