Krishnegowda Vs Pushpa

JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.04.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.49/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MEMBER, ADDITONAL MACT, HASSAN.

¶26

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

¶27

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:34377 MFA No. 6278 of 2022

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶30

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶31

The claimant, being dissatisfied with the compensation of Rs.6,40,448/- awarded by the Tribunal, is in appeal.

¶32

The fact that the accident occurred and the further fact

¶33

that the offending vehicle was insured is not in dispute.

¶34

The Tribunal, on assessment of evidence, has awarded

¶35

the following sums as compensation:

¶36

Sl. No.	Particulars	Amount in (Rs.)
1.	Pain and sufferings	80,000
2.	Medical expenses	82,368
3.	Diet, food, nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges,	30,000
4.	Loss of income during laid up period	39,000
5.	Loss of future income	3,79,080
6.	Loss of amenities	30,000
	Total	6,40,448

¶37

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:34377 MFA No. 6278 of 2022

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

The Tribunal, on an analysis of the medical evidence, has concluded that the claimant has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 27% to the whole body, which is just and proper.

¶40

The Tribunal has wrongly assessed the monthly income of the injured at Rs.13,000/-. Since there is no credible documentary evidence to ascertain the actual monthly income, the Tribunal ought to have taken the monthly income determined by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, which, for the accident of the year 2017, would be Rs.11,000/-. Since the disability is at the rate of 27%, in view of law laid by the Division Bench of this Court in MFA No.103807/2016 and connected with other matter and also by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sidram vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd reported in 2023 (3) SCC 439 , the future prospects of 10% is added to the income. Hence, the income would be at Rs.12,100/- (11,000 + 10%).

¶41

As the claimant was aged 58 years, a multiplier of '9' would have to be applied. Consequently, the claimant would be

¶42

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:34377 MFA No. 6278 of 2022

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

entitled to a sum of Rs.3,52,836/- (12,100 x 12 x 9 x 27%) towards 'loss of future income'.

¶45

As a consequence, the amount of Rs.39,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards 'loss of income during the laid up period' would also come to Rs.33,000/- (11,000 X 3).

¶46

Having regard to the injuries suffered by the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards 'pain and suffering' as against Rs.80,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶47

Having regard to the lasting effects of the injuries on the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities, as against the sum of Rs.30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶48

The sum awarded as medical expenses at Rs.82,368/-, being based on documentary evidence, do not call for modification and hence confirmed.

¶49

The sums awarded under other heads of compensation granted by the Tribunal, remains unaltered.

¶50

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:34377 MFA No. 6278 of 2022

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified and

¶53

the claimant would be entitled to the following compensation:

¶54

Sl. No.	Compensation under different Heads	As awarded by the Tribunal	As awarded by this Court
		(Rs.)	(Rs.)
1.	Pain and sufferings	80,000	1,00,000
2.	Medical expenses	82,368	82,368
3.	Diet, food, nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges,	30,000	30,000
4.	Loss of income during laid up period	39,000	33,000
5.	Loss of future income	3,79,080	3,52,836
6.	Loss of amenities	30,000	50,000
7.	Total	6,40,448	6,48,204

¶55

Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total compensation of Rs.6,48,204/- as against Rs.6,40,448/-, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶56

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:34377 MFA No. 6278 of 2022

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

The Tribunal has erred while awarding interest to the compensation. As per the law laid down by Division Bench of this Court in MFA No.5896/2018 the rate of interest to be awarded shall be 6%. Hence the same is reduced to 6% as against 9% awarded by the Tribunal.

¶59

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶60

The appeal is accordingly allowed in part .

¶61

SD/(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE

¶62

GPG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Krishnegowda v. Pushpa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnegowda v. Pushpa

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

The Managing Director Vs Smt Maremma @ Mariyamma

The Commissioner Vs Sri George Philip Kaleekal

Padmashree Vs the Managing Director

Smt Umadevi Vs Smt. Deepa Shri

Paneer Selvam Vs Venkatesh

Jayalakshmi Vs Mrs K Prasadini Hegde