Smt. Megha G @ Meghana G Vs Sri N Suresh

SRI N SURESH Digitally signed by S/O LATE NANJEGOWDA NANJUNDACHARI MAJOR IN AGE Location: HIGH COURT OF R/AT INDUAVALU KARNATAKA KOTHATHI, MANDYA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT.

¶14

THE BRANCH MANAGER M/S. BAJAJ ALIANZ GENERAL INS. CO. LTD., GOLDEN HEIGHTS 4^TH FLOOR, 59^TH C CROSS 4^TH M BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU 3 560010.

¶15

&RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI H.S. LINGARAJU, ADV. FOR R2 NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.12.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.4032/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND ACCMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU SCCH-13, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶21

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

¶22

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

¶25

The claimant not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded dated 23.12.2022 in

¶26

MVC.No.4031/2019 on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-13) (for short, 8the Tribunal9) is before this Court in this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶27

Brief facts of the case are that, the claimant

¶28

filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation for the accidental injuries suffered by her in a road traffic accident that occurred on

¶29

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶30

HC-KAR

¶31

20.04.2019 involving motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-53-EC-4438 and lorry bearing registration No.KA11-7557. It is stated that the claimant was working as Tailor and was earning a sum of Rs.20,000/- p.m. It is further stated that the clamant suffered grievous injuries and she is not in a position to earn the same income which she was earning prior to the accident.

¶32

On service of notice, respondent No.2 3 Insurance company appeared and filed statement of objections denying the claim petition averments. Further, it is stated that liability if any would be subject to the terms and conditions of the policy. Further, it is stated that the driver of the offending vehicle is not made party who would be a necessary party. Further, it is stated that the accident occurred solely due to the negligent riding of the motorcycle and there is no negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry.

¶33

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

The claimant examined herself as PW1 and

¶36

examined PW4-Doctor apart from marking Ex.P1 to Ex.P26 documents. No witness is examined on behalf of the respondents nor any documents marked.

¶37

The Tribunal considering the material on record

¶38

awarded the total compensation of Rs.16,99,830/- on the

¶39

following heads:

¶40

Sl.No.	Nature of compensation	Amount
1.	Loss of future earnings	Rs. 4,53,600/-
2.	Pain and sufferings	Rs. 40,000/-
3.	Loss of amenities	Rs. 25,000/-
4.	Medical expenses	Rs. 10,50,230/-
5.	Future medical expenses	Rs. 24,000/-
6.	Conveyance, food, Nourishment & Attendant charges	Rs. 50,000/-
7.	Loss of income during laid up period	Rs. 56,000/-
	TOTAL	Rs. 16,99,830/-

¶41

While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal assessed the income of the claimant/injured notionally at Rs.14,000/- p.m., assessed whole body disability at 15% and awarded the compensation on the other heads as indicated above. Not being satisfied with

¶42

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

the quantum of compensation awarded, the

¶45

claimant/injured is before this Court in this appeal.

¶46

Heard learned counsel Smt.Suguna R. Reddy for appellant/claimant and learned counsel Sri.H.S.Lingaraju for respondent No.2. Perused the entire material on record including the Trial Court Records.

¶47

Learned counsel Smt.Suguna R. Reddy for claimant/injured would contend that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the impugned judgment and award is on the lower side and it is submitted that the claimant would be entitled for much more compensation than awarded by the Tribunal. Learned counsel would submit that the Doctor has assessed the disability to a particular limb at 75% and the Tribunal without appreciating the evidence of PW4 3 Doctor, solely on the ground that PW4 is not a treated Doctor, assessed the whole body disability at 15% which is totally opposed to the medical records. Learned counsel

¶48

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

would submit that the Tribunal ought to have assessed it

¶51

1/3^rd of the disability of a particular limb. Thus, it is submitted that the whole body disability assessed by the Tribunal is required to be re-assessed by this Court.

¶52

Learned counsel would also submit that the

¶53

injured/claimant was inpatient for more than 35 days initially and the compensation awarded on the head of pain and sufferings and loss of amenities are on the lower side. Learned counsel would also submit that the claimant has filed I.A.No.2/2023 for producing medical bills which relates to treatment taken subsequent to award. It is submitted that the medical bills produced along with I.A.No.2/2023 would amount to Rs.2,63,650/-, which the claimant would be entitled to.

¶54

With regard I.A.No.2/2023, learned counsel Sri.H.S.Lingaraju for respondent No.2 3 insurance company would submit that the insurance company has verified and he has instructions to submit that since the

¶55

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

bills are verified, the claimant would be entitled for the amount towards medical bills.

¶58

Learned counsel Sri.H.S.Lingaraju per contra would submit that the income assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.14,000/- per month notionally is not under challenge and further submits that the Tribunal rightly assessed the whole body disability at 15% since the claimant has not explained how the injury has affected her earning capacity. Further, learned counsel would submit that the compensation awarded under other heads are proper and correct, which needs no interference.

¶59

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the entire appeal papers including the Trial Court Records, the following points would fall for our consideration:

¶60

a) Whether the assessment of disability of whole body at 15% by the Tribunal is proper and correct?

¶61

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

b) Whether the claimant would be entitled for enhancement of compensation?

¶64

Answer to the above points would be in the negative and affirmative respectively for the following reasons:

¶65

The accident that occurred on 20.04.2019 involving motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-53-EC-4438 and lorry bearing registration No.KA-11-7557 and the injuries sustained by the claimant is not in dispute in this appeal. The claimant has suffered the following injuries in terms of Ex.P7 3 Wound certificate:

¶66

Aberrations present over both knees.

¶67

Blunt injury to right leg.

¶68

In support of the claim, claimant has examined herself as PW2 and examined PW4 3 Dr.Nagaraj.B.N. It is an admitted fact that PW4 is not a treated Doctor. However, the medical records would indicate that the disability certificate issued indicates 75% of the disability to a particular limb and if that is so, the Tribunal ought to

¶69

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶70

HC-KAR

¶71

have assessed the whole body disability at 1/3^rd of the disability to a particular limb in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of RAJ KUMAR VS. AJAY KUMAR AND ANOTHER¹ . The Tribunal committed an error in assessing whole body disability at 15% when the disability to a particular limb as stated by the Doctor is 75%. Thus, we re-assess the whole body disability at 25% as against 15% assessed by the Tribunal.

¶72

I.A.No.2/2023 is filed seeking leave to produce additional documents. Along with I.A.No.2/2023, appellant has placed on record the medical bills totally amounting to Rs.2,85,325/-. It is submitted that the bills produced along with I.A.No.2/2023 are the bills in respect of treatment taken subsequent to passing of the award by the Tribunal i.e., towards future treatment.

¶73

Learned counsel Sri.H.S.Lingaraju on instructions from the insurance company would submit

¶74

1 (2011) 1 SCC 343

¶75

10 - NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶76

HC-KAR

¶77

that the bills are verified by the insurance company and

¶78

they found it genuine.

¶79

Therefore, we allow I.A.No.2/2023 holding that

¶80

the claimant would be entitled for a sum of Rs.2,85,325/towards medical bills for future treatment taken.

¶81

It is not in dispute that the claimant was inpatient for more than 35 days. It is also stated that the claimant had undergone three surgeries. Taking note of the above, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal on the head of pain and sufferings at Rs.40,000/- is on the lower side. Taking note of the injuries sustained, treatment taken and surgeries undergone, we enhance the same to Rs.75,000/- from Rs.40,000/-.

¶82

The compensation awarded by the Tribunal on the head of Loss of amenities is also on the lower side and the same is enhanced to Rs.50,000/- from Rs.25,000/-.

¶83

The compensation awarded on the other heads i.e., towards medical expenses, future medical expenses,

¶84

11 -

¶85

NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶86

HC-KAR

¶87

conveyance, food, nourishment and attendant charges are

¶88

proper and correct, needs no interference.

¶89

Thus, the claimant would be entitled for

¶90

modified compensation on the head of loss of future

¶91

earnings as under:

¶92

Rs.14,000 X 12 X 18 X 25% = Rs.7,56,000/- .

¶93

Thus, the claimant would be entitled for

¶94

modified compensation as follows:

¶95

Sl.No.	Head of Compensation	Amount in Rs.
1.	Loss of future earnings	7,56,000/-
2.	Pain and Sufferings	75,000/-
3.	Loss of amenities	50,000/-
4.	Medical expenses	10,50,230/-
5.	Future medical expenses	25,000/-
6.	Conveyance, Food, Nourishment & Attendant charges	50,000/-
7.	Loss of income duringlaid up period	56,000/-
8.	Towards treatment taken and the medical billsproduced bythe claimant	2,85,325/-
	TOTAL	23,47,555/-

¶96

Thus, the claimants would be entitled to a total

¶97

compensation of Rs.23,47,555/- as against Rs.16,99,830/-

¶98

awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization.

¶99

12 -

¶100

NC: 2026:KHC:18943-DB MFA No. 7601 of 2023

¶101

HC-KAR

¶102

It is made clear that the claimant would not be

¶103

entitled for interest on the amount of medical bills which is

¶104

awarded in this appeal to an extent of Rs.2,85,325/-.

¶105

In the result, we proceed to pass the following:

¶106

ORDER

¶107

a) Appeal is allowed in part.

¶108

b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified holding that the claimants would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.23,47,555/as against Rs.16,99,830/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶109

c) The modified compensation to the extent of Rs.20,62,230/- shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization.

¶110

d) The respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the entire compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.

¶111