Narendra Vs M/S Ramesh Enterprises

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.10.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.4435/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU SCCH-13, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶23

IN MFA NO. 764/2023

¶24

BETWEEN:

¶25

MADHU M S/O MANJUNATH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT WARD NO.09 NEAR QUBA MASJID MARUTHI EXTENSION, MALUR KOLAR DISTRICT 563130.

¶26

...APPELLANT

¶27

(BY SRI. KAILAS SHANKAR P S.,ADVOCATE)

¶28

AND:

¶29

M/S RAMESH ENTERPRISES PROP. SRI RAMESHA,MAJOR NO.74, SANTHEHALLI POST DYAPASANDRA VILLAGE MALUR TALUK, KOLAR 563130. 2. THE MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD REGIONAL OFFICE NO.9/2, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS M G ROAD, BANGALORE 560001.

¶30

...RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI.B C SHIVANNEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.10.2022 PASSED

¶32

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:6506 MFA No. 763 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 764 of 2023

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

IN MVC NO.4434/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND ACMM, COURT OF SAMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU SCCH-13, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶35

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

¶36

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶37

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶38

Heard Sri. Kailas Shankar P.S., learned counsel who represents the appellants in both the appeals as well as Sri.B.C. Shivannegowda, learned counsel for respondent No.2 in both the appeals.

¶39

These two appeals arise out of the common order rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC No.4434/2019 and MVC No.4435/2019 dated 27.10.2022. While the claimant in MVC No.4435/2019 filed MFA No.763/2023, the claimant in MVC No.4434/2019 filed MFA No.764/2023.

¶40

Both the claimants filed respective appeals seeking enhancement in compensation.

¶41

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:6506 MFA No. 763 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 764 of 2023

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

The matrix in both the cases is that while both

¶44

the claimants were proceeding on a motorcycle on 25.03.2019, a lorry bearing registration No.KA-53-D-6974 which was driven by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner dashed against their motorcycle, due to which they fell down and sustained injuries.

¶45

So far as appellant in MFA No.763/2023, who is the claimant in MVC No.4435/2019 is concerned, as per his version he sustained fracture of L3 vertebrae and other simple injuries. The nature of injury sustained and that he took treatment as inpatient for 2 days is not in dispute. The Tribunal through the impugned order awarded global compensation of ₹ 60,000/- in toto.

¶46

Learned counsel for the appellant contends that

¶47

appellant sustained grievous injury and could not attend his normal work for long period. Thus, the compensation granted is on the lower side.

¶48

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:6506 MFA No. 763 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 764 of 2023

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

On the other hand, learned counsel for

¶51

respondent No.2 submits that appellant did not choose to examine the doctor who treated him. He also failed to establish his occupation and earnings as on the date of accident and therefore, the compensation granted by the Tribunal is justifiable.

¶52

Admittedly, appellant sustained fracture of L3 vertebrae which is grievous in nature. Having considered the nature of injury sustained, this Court is of the view that appellant could have taken bed rest at least for a period of three months. He might have incurred considerable amount for food, extra nourishment, attendant and transportation charges. Therefore, viewed from any angle, appellant is entitled to an additional sum of ₹25,000/-. Therefore, this Court concludes that appellant in MFA No.763/2023 who is the claimant in MVC.No.4435/2019 is entitled to an additional sum of ₹ 25,000/-.

¶53

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:6506 MFA No. 763 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 764 of 2023

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

Coming to the appellant in MFA No.764/2023

¶56

who is the claimant in MVC No.4434/2019, by all the evidence produced, he established that he sustained right olecranon fracture and left forearm both bone fracture which are grievous in nature and he underwent a surgery. PW.3 assessed the disability of right arm as 42%, left arm as 45% and whole body as 27%. The Tribunal taking into consideration the totality of evidence produced, came to a conclusion that the disability in respect of whole body can be taken as 12%. The said observation needs no interference. The submission that is made by learned counsel for appellant is that appellant by doing work as painter was earning ₹20,000/- per month and due to the injuries sustained, he is unable to attend work as painter. Learned counsel also states that compensation granted under all heads is on lower side.

¶57

The submission that is made by learned counsel

¶58

for respondent No.2 on the other hand is that the Tribunal

¶59

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:6506 MFA No. 763 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 764 of 2023

¶60

HC-KAR

¶61

has awarded a sum of ₹4,88,161/- as compensation which is justifiable.

¶62

Admittedly, a painter will face much difficulty to continue his work with a disability of 42% in respect of right arm and 45% in respect of left arm. Having considered the fact that the disability in respect of whole body is 12% and also the occupation of the appellant, this Court considers desirable to add future prospects. By all the evidence produced, appellant established that he was aged around 22 years as on the date of accident. Therefore, 40% of the earnings are required to be added towards future prospects. Thus, on adding 40% towards future prospects, taking the notional income of the appellant as ₹14,000/per month, applying the appropriate multiplier '18' and the disability in respect of whole body as 12%, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive towards loss of future earnings comes to ₹5,08,032/- (Rs.14,000x12+40%x18x12/100). The Tribunal granted a sum of ₹ 3,62,880/- only towards loss

¶63

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:6506 MFA No. 763 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 764 of 2023

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

of future earnings. Also, as rightly contented, the compensation granted towards pain and suffering, loss of amenities and loss of income during laid up period are on lower side. Under those heads, this Court is of the view that appellant is entitled to an additional sum of ₹50,000/-

¶66

in toto. As earlier discussed, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive towards loss of future earnings is ₹5,08,032/-. The Tribunal granted a sum of ₹ 3,62,880/- only under the said head. Thus, the appellant

¶67

is entitled to an additional sum of ₹1,45,152/- under the said head (₹5,08,032.00 -₹3,62,880.00). Also the additional sum awarded under other heads collectively is ₹50,000/-. Therefore, total amount which appellant is entitled to receive in addition to the sum that is awarded by the Tribunal is ₹ 1,95,152/-. Thus, both the appeals are disposed of with the following:

¶68

ORDER

¶69

i. Both the appeals are allowed in part .

¶70

9 -

¶71

NC: 2026:KHC:6506 MFA No. 763 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 764 of 2023

¶72

HC-KAR

¶73

ii. The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru, through orders in MVC No.4435/2019 is enhanced by ₹25,000/-.

¶74

iii. The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru, through orders in MVC No.4434/2019 is enhanced by ₹1,95,152/-.

¶75

iv. The enhanced amount in both the appeals shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of respective petitions till the date of deposit.

¶76

v. Order of 'pay and recovery' is confirmed and it applies to enhanced sum as well.

¶77

vi. Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.

¶78

vii. On such deposit, the appellants are permitted to withdraw the same.

¶79

Sd/(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE

¶80

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

¶81

SSD

Narendra v. M/S Ramesh Enterprises

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra v. M/S Ramesh Enterprises

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

G M Yogsh Gowda Vs Future General India Insurance Company Limited

R M Ananda Vs Miss Prabhavathi

Mrs. Rashmi. M. S. Vs Mr. Suprith Kolli

Smt. Latha Vs Sri. Gangadhar Kotiyavar

Kalavathi C K Vs Rangappa

Sri.G.J.Manohar Vs Smt.Swetha S