Ramesh Kotian Vs Muhammed Mukthar Hassan

MUHAMMED MUKTHAR HASSAN S/O ABDUL RAHAMAN AGED 25 YEARS R/AT D-221A, BISMILLAH MANZIL BELLAIRU ROAD, BELLAIRU VILLAGE HALEANGADY, MANGALUR D.K.DISTRICT-574146.

¶13

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:13786 M.F.A. No.2964/2020

¶14

HC-KAR

¶15

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE AT MAXIMUM COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, 4TH FLOOR LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD OPP. KMC COLLEGE, MANGALURU D.K.DISTRICT-575 001 REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNA REDDY, ADV., FOR SRI. LAKSHMINARAYAN C, ADV., FOR R2 V/O/DTD:14.03.2023 NOTICE TO R1 D/W)

¶18

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.01.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.571/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MACT, D.K, MANGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal is filed by the injured/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 11.01.2019 passed in

¶23

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:13786 M.F.A. No.2964/2020

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

MVC.No.571/2018 by the VI Additional District & Session Judge & MACT, D.K., Mangaluru, (for short, ‘Tribunal’).

¶26

Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

¶27

Smt.Poojaparvathi U., learned counsel for Sri.Ravishankar Shastry G., learned counsel for the appellant submits that Tribunal has committed a grave error in appreciating the oral and documentary evidence.

¶28

The appellant was working as a room boy in Hotel Namdev, Kulur, Mangalore, and was earning more than Rs.12,000/- per month. The appellant-claimant sustained two grievous injuries and four simple injuries as is evident from Ex.P6. However, the Tribunal has awarded meager compensation on all heads, hence, she seeks to enhance the same appropriately.

¶29

Per contra, Sri.Mallikarjun Reddy, learned

¶30

counsel for Sri.Lakshminarayan C., learned counsel

¶31

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:13786 M.F.A. No.2964/2020

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

appearing for respondent No.2 - insurance company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the appellant has sustained minor injuries and he was inpatient for a period of 3 days and thereafter he was discharged and he has neither lost the job nor sustained any disability. Considering the said aspect, the Tribunal has awarded just compensation which does not call for any interference.

¶34

I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing on both the sides and meticulously perused the material available on record including the Tribunal records.

¶35

The only point that would arise for

¶36

consideration in this appeal is :

¶37

" Whether the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal calls for any interference?"

¶38

It is not in dispute that the appellant-claimant

¶39

met with a road accident on 13.01.2018 and sustained the

¶40

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:13786 M.F.A. No.2964/2020

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

injuries viz., bilateral black eye, reddish abrasion on the left side of the forehead, reddish abrasion on the right cheek with CT scan showing fracture of maxilla and right orbital floor, reddish abrasion on the nose, reddish contusion on the left shoulder with x-ray showing underlying fracture of neck of scapula, reddish abrasion on the right wrist and two grievous and four simple injuries to other parts of his body, as is evident from Ex.P6.

¶43

It is averred that the appellant was working as a room boy at Hotel Namdev, Kulur, Mangalore, and earning more than Rs.12,000/- per month. The records indicate that the appellant was in-patient at A.J.Hospital and Research Centre, Kuntikana, Mangalore for a period of 4 days and thereafter he has taken follow-up treatment. In support of his claim, the appellant-claimant has examined himself as PW1 and got marked the police records as Exs.P1 to P5; wound certificate as Ex.P6; discharge summary as Ex.P10 and medical bills as Exs.P11 to P18. Upon perusal of the said documents and the oral

¶44

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:13786 M.F.A. No.2964/2020

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

evidence, it is to be noticed that the appellant has not suffered any permanent disablement due to the injuries, however, he sustained two grievous injuries and four simple injuries in the said road accident. Considering the said aspect, I am of the view that the compensation is required to be re-assessed appropriately. Hence, the appellant-claimant would be entitled to compensation of Rs.40,000/- towards pain & suffering; Rs.15,000/- towards food, attendant and conveyance charges; Rs.25,000/- towards loss of enjoyment/amenities in life, etc. The appellant would be entitled to Rs.25,000/- towards the loss of income during laid-up period. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses is unaltered. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to the modified compensation as under:

¶47

HEADS	AMOUNT (in Rs.)
Pain & suffering	40,000
Medical expenses	18,900
Food, attendant and conveyance charges	15,000
Loss of income during laid up period	25,000

¶48

7 -

¶49

NC: 2026:KHC:13786 M.F.A. No.2964/2020

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

Loss of amenities/enjoyment in life	25,000
Total	1,23,900

¶52

Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a

¶53

total compensation of Rs.1,23,900/- as against Rs.74,400/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶54

In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the

¶55

following:

¶56

ORDER

¶57

a) Appeal is allowed in part .

¶58

b) The impugned judgment and award of the

¶59

Tribunal is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.1,23,900/- as

¶60

against Rs.74,400/awarded by the Tribunal.

¶61

c) The enhanced compensation amount shall

¶62

carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment.

¶63

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:13786 M.F.A. No.2964/2020

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

d) The Insurance Company shall deposit the

¶66

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.

¶67

e) The entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellantclaimant.

¶68

f) Registry shall transmit the records to the Tribunal forthwith.

¶69

g) Registry shall draw modified award accordingly.

¶70

Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE

¶71

BSR

¶72

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Ramesh Kotian v. Muhammed Mukthar Hassan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Kotian v. Muhammed Mukthar Hassan

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

Godwin Pereira Vs Munavar M

Mr Jabeer @ Mahammad Jabir Vs United India Insurance Company Ltd.

Santhosh Kumar P C Vs B Gnanendra Prasad

Sri Lohith K M Vs Bajaj Allianz General

D B Balakrishna Vs Padmanabha C C

Baby Rakshitha Vs the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.