High Court Karnataka High Court

Kum Sumithra D/O R Venkatesh vs Sri N V Puttalakshmaiah on 27 October, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Kum Sumithra D/O R Venkatesh vs Sri N V Puttalakshmaiah on 27 October, 2010
Author: N.K.Patil And H.S.Kempanna
' {By 'Sm, 'Ba1.ara_j_.A. C. Advocate}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010.
: PRESENT :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. PATIL 

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE    T.

M.F.A.NO. 10616 032005 (lvm. f'jj~_ >  '
Between: T

Kum. Sumithra,

D/0. R.Venkatesh,

Aged about 9 years,

Since minor represented.  .  --
By her natural guardian "father,, . V "
Sri. Rvenkatesh, Major,'  '  =

R/0. Meda_ra'S:treet,.A =   _ _
Hospeij, MagadiV'E0wn=a1T€i» " __
Presently 1*/at. N0."2'4,b_  N V'
I Phase, 2fl€1_ViVIvain,-_
Man} tmatha1 1aga1"','
BVa1i:ga101*-P3560 0 1.Q_.____¢ .

 '"   Appellant

' A115: i

1 . 44Sri('VN.V:.Putta1akshmaiah,
S /0, Fathers name not known,

~, A' 'w_E}/Iajor, Sri. Rajalakshmi Motors,
*  Mudalapanne.

Hullikunte Post,
Koratagere Taluk,
Tumkur District-572 101.



2. M / 55. National Ensurance

Co., Ltd..

Branch Office,
Muddappa Complex.
Vivekananda Road,
Turnkur-572 101.

By its Authorised Officer.   
 Respondents

(By 811′. H.B.Nagaraju, Advocate for R1; A’ V A
Sri. Venkatesh.R.Bhagat, Advocate for R2} .. _ ”

=l==i==§==l<*=!=:

This MFA is filed U/Vs .173(i}t_er– MV Act’: againsteegee _
Judgment and Award dated: .1_O/.02/2004 p_as:-3eC{.__iI1~1\/I’s7C No”.

2325/2001 on the file of th’e.._XvI Add1_. V’J:idge,, Member,
MACT, Bangalore (s_(:cI–I-24;, _’part1y a11o’wiIf1g_~3the claim
petition for eompen$_at1′,_on fand seeking enhancement of
compensation with interest a’–‘:_ 12% ”

_ ” Hearing, this day,
N .K. ZVPATIL. ;J_,, dé”:1ivered” the following:

A D G M E N T

A. — .. claimant is directed against the

cir’r11«):.u5g”3;1eCi..g and award dated 10*” February

in M.V.C.No.2825/2001, by the XVI

Ad._diti_oI1al~” dudge, Member, Motor Accident Claims

..TribtIria1, Bangalore {SCCH-14], (for short, Tribunal’ ]

A’._Vfor”enhancement of cgmpensation on the ground that,

/, WM

the compensation of 399.375/– awarded in his favour as
against his claim for ?°O5.00 lakhs, is inadequate.

2. The appellant claims to be aged about

studying in Nursery and she was hale and

to the date of accident. That at about on

04-2000, when the father of the ap-peeliiatiz-ti

near the road, at that time; the appellant >

relatives house by crossing road to ‘ to her house,
after crossing the %.j_ptha’t.vpivti.:me, a Bus bearing
Registration No;’£’N–32’/’C—-:77V§9.”earrie Hospete circle
in a rterrifieiiip “speed, in a rash and
negligent manner’:.i’and.V_:Ei-a,sl1ed against the appellant and

as aresultVthe’;–saine;'”she fell down and thereafter, the

V’ _ front \2\rhee’l’ of the bus stood on the right leg. As

same, the right leg was Crushed. The

Rivas immediately rushed to Magadi

nGovern.1ti1ent Hospital for treatment and a complaint was

3. It is the case of the appellant that she was in-

patient in the Hospital :for 33 days in two different

/ WMMM

hospitals, during which period, her father has spent
considerable amount towards conveyance, nourishing

food and attendant charges including medical veifipenses

and other incidental expenses and she

amputation of her right leg below knee. Doctor.

has assessed disability in resii3,ect_-iiofi’l7’v£)”/lb

and in respect of Whole boid3r__Vat 50?/'<5 andV'vthCg:re_for_e,

has to be compensated reas_on'a,bi3z,

4. On a’ccount'”of.,”the._injurie.s””sustained in the

accident, minor, represented by
her father, filed”then’clairn,-~petition under Section 166 of

the_.Motor”Vlehicies’v. before the Tribunal, seeking

Acorripensat,ion loflmallvsum of 305.00 lakhs against the

said claim petition had come up for

before the Tribunal on 10th February

Z The Tribunal, after considering the relevant

it griiaterial available on file and after appreciation of the

” »—oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim

petition in part, awarding a sum of 399,375/– with

X,
LM_W_fl__H_,_,.,,.

interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till
the date of realization. Being dissatisfied with the
quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribu;na.l, the
appellant is in appeal before this

enhancement of compensation.

5. We have heard learned if

and learned counsel for-.__ Insurance ‘for*.

considerable length of time. _

6. After hearirilg _lAearn_ec.1 ” ~c_ourisel for the parties

and after perusal of .tl1-e.”award passed by

Tribunal ‘ineludi5;fig tlie’originai’records placed before us,
we are of. the VVieyJgth.at,44’t.’;1e occurrence of accident and

the.resulta1’it inj’–urives”sustained by appellant are not in

igaisof not in dispute that she was aged

years and studying in Nursery. The

‘l”1Tlbu:¥1??¢l:,fA4_’.~’aft€1′ assessing the oral and documentary

up evidence available on file, has rightly awarded

if vgcornpensation of ?8,000/~ towards medical expenses.

–Hence, it does not call for interference.

fin

‘7. However, the Tribunal erred in not awarding
reasonable compensation towards other heads and

further erred in not awarding any compensation

towards loss of future income, future medical

and loss of marriage prospects.

taken treatment totally for j;33_ ‘:

Hospitals and during this,pe__riod,” being

years, would have under gone lot of’-unsaidvfgpain and
agony and must ‘h_a:i’e 5_spent”~-.._con~siderable amount

towards conveyantgg… .;qou.rish~;ng”‘ and attendant

charge’s’,”apa;rt ‘”mgedical_'”e’Xpenses. The Doctor has

assessed in respect of right leg and

50% in r’espect,’,*oft’=wVh’ole body. The appellant, being

V’ . on.ly’-5 yearsfat the time of accident, has to pull on

disability for the rest of her life and she

canlnot a normal girl and do the work as other

xgirlszofther age can do. in View of the injuries and the

-..’magnitude of disability at this young age, we feel that,

= …-definitely her marriage prospects are likely to be

affected. Accordingly, ‘ng into consideration all the
WM_,_,,,,..,

above aspects, we re~deter1nine compensation by
awarding a sum of ?1,00,000/– towards pain and

sufferings as against ?40,000/–; ?’10,000/~ towards

conveyance, nourishing food and attendant «charge-s;~ as

against %1,375/–; $75,000; towards 1oss__of–.:aInfenities;–d up

discomforts, and unhappiness
as against ?50,00o/- awalfélefl bifTi§ibuna1’;–‘i~a ° d

8. Further, it is the has not
awarded any medical

expenses, loss of futL1r€,_i11Ct}IIiaC “a”nd””-loss of marriage

prospects; to”_’ti1″e’V4nature of injuries, the

youngvvage of the nature and duration of

treatment the percentage of disability which she

an,.,.,haS;….’t()i,,”eI1d1aE1’6 ‘tor””t}1e remaining part of her life, we

?50,000/~ towards future medical

/– towards loss of marriage prospects

a-sum of 31,12,500/« (i.e. ?15,ooo/« x ’15’ x

50,1190), taking the notional income of €15,000/– per

-annuin, adopting inultipiier of ’15’ and accepting the

V whole body disabiiity at as assessed by Doctor.

9. In the light of the facts and circumstances of

the case, as stated above, the appeal filed by_4va,pp:el-1_ant

is allowed in part. The impugned

dated 10th February 2004, pas.se_d inH’M;i?;vCfP€o_..23-2,5″»_

/2001, by the XVI Additionalt-‘Judige, iimierabei,1i’iME5:gr

Accident Claims Tribunal;-..Bang’alore_pp is’

hereby modified, awarding~—-a”p’:–stiIn “?’4.,05:500/~ as
against ?99,37 5 / — interest at
6% per on the date of
petition till The break~«up is as

follows?’ *

Towards Pain aiid~sufferin–gs 1,oo,o0o /-

/’I4/’~H

TOWa1’dSfi Loss’ of = amenities & 75,000/-

enjoyment”iri’ life;

Towards Medicalv_’l§;;{)enses 3′ 08,000 / –

.Toiwar~Eis conveyance, nourishing 3′ 10.000/–

‘ ,fo0d ‘attendant charges

‘1″owardfs.,-‘of marriage prospects ?’ 50,000 / —
3′

Towards’ ‘fijitiire medical expenses 50,000 / –

To”war._ds “kiss of future income 1’ 1, 12,500,
‘ Total ? 4,05,500/-

H The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the

___enhanced compensation of ‘<'3,06,125/–, with interest

As

I

thereon at 6% per annum, Within four Weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of the judgment and award

On such deposit by the Insurance Company,"'the

enhanced compensation of 33,06,125/-,
$250,000/– with proportionate interest,' it '
Fixed Deposit, in any Nationalized oi§_'_'S'ehedi1_led'V

the name of the appellant –'nfii11or, till she_aVttains"rnajority;'V V

and thereafter renewable for ano'Lher.._five 'years, liberty
reserved to her natural. ;'t1ar'dian; létoltlvivrithdraw the interest
periodically, for her welfaz' e. if V

The p ii'er.ri_'ai;1ing_ 1; ?'56, 125 /W with

proportionate interest rel_dea.se-d I in favour of the

appellant through' herirratiiraligti immediately.

Qffice tO_§draw acoerdingly.

H

Iudgé
Sd/–

fudge