IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBEILZO 10 THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B.sREENrv§§sE Miscellaneous First Appeal B BEFORE.' Between Shri. M Suresh, S/O Marigowda, Aged about 39 Years, No.5, 15* F1001', . Beiur Iyengar Bakeryf B' ; Chanchaghatta R0at:i,...," ' Konanakunt-e,' 'A B Baflgaloff? ... Appellant "(By 's..BI;:a'N C'0n1}£)any, Advs.] 1 ' . " Re1iar'1c.eVGenerai Insurance Co. Ltd., ._5l"r3 F1001"; 'Ce:1terma1'y Building, 'Ne.,2}8_, M. G. Road, B. ""vBéLn'gal'e.re -- O1 v'__-.'am__uBha, "~--W/'O. B P Siddeshwara " _ No.34, Police Road, Ranasinghpet, Bangalore. Respondents
(By Sri. H S Lingaraj, Adv. for R1,
Notice to R2 is dispensed With)
I\.)
This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act, against
the judgement and award dated 08.04.2008 passed in
MVC No.1251/2007′ on the file of XVIII Additional
Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, MACT4,
Bangalore, SCCI~l–4, partly allowing the clai–rri-petition
for compensation and seeking enhar1’ee.rnent;_. of
compensation. =
This MFA coming on for””h-earing,_,:.this_
Court, delivered the i’ollow1ng:I_: gt}
Jnnqmngg
This appeal s is seeking
enhancement of by the
Tribunal.
2. For thesake of”eonVe,riience parties are referred to
as theylVareVl.51jefenfed- the lolaim petition.
3. facts _ of .the.ll-ease are:
3..lAfi’h’at lo’n«…._0.8′.02.2007 when the claimant was
dr.i\{ing* sumo car bearing registration No.
‘C AKEi¥05¥.liil:§'”)!9418 on Bangalore – Kanakapura road, near
Somfgdiahally KPTCL from Harohally side towards
A .’lE3angalore a lorry bearing registration No.C’I’X–803O
came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed
against the car, as a result the car was fully damaged
and the claimant sustained grievous injuries. Hence,
he filed a claim petition before MACT, Bangalore
seeking compensation of Rs.3.G0,000/–
Tribunal has awarded compensation -7
with interest at 6% pa
4. As there is no dispute i=.3garrding”oC(:urren(:eV”of
accident, negligence and liability of. the of the
offending vehicle the only’ that”‘re’rr1ains for
consideration is:
§Whepi:her’:_the Compensation awarded by
the .Tribujn_al is just aI}–d.jreasponab1e or does it
call for “enh’at1cer(1ent?’i–
5. _After’ hearing.v’th.e””1earned Counsel appearing for
the parties and -per_nsi.rig the judgment and award of the
I the view that the compensation
V the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it
it ‘islvlon _the?.g_1ower side and therefore it is deserved to be
enhaneed.
A’ per wound certificate Ex P <1 the claimant has
siistained the following injuries:
i} Surgical sutured wound over the right side
upper lip; ._
ii) Loosening (displacement) of rightlrliiigyper
incisor teeth and blunt
forehead;
iii} Nose and maxillary area_Witjh coiitjusiorir, V
injuries sustained and treatment talten
evident from OPD card anldalsupported’ by”‘.=or”2.::llllevidencel
of the claimant 1_ll’1~re has not
examined the doctor
7. Considering the injuries sustained by
the clailnaiifaikfarded by the Tribunal
towards on the lower side and it is
deserved’-.._to.be._enlj1anéed by Rs.10,000/– and I award
/a Aund_ersthis head.
-v..VfI’he«nclaimant has produced medical bills for
‘nsl§2,soog_ét’a1=ldand the Tribunal has rightly awarded
— towards medical and incidental expenses
” _ and there is no scope for enhancement under this head.
3:
9. The claimant claims that he was earning
Rs.25,000/- by working as Engineer and con_tra<:tor,
but no document is produced in this
Considering the nature of injuries V."
treatment 1 award Rs.10,000/{towards [of'infcoi.-:iex ' j
during laid up period as against__Rs_i6:,7dC{'§
the Tribunal.
10. Considering loosening
{displacement} of right teeth and blunt
injury awarded by the
Tribunal’ and discomfort is on
Rs.10,000/- under this
head. bl
..__has examined the doctor regarding
_ «fiigabiiity.ithierefore he is not entitled for compensation
towards, «loss of future income.
Considering the nature of injuries particularly
loosening (displacement) of right upper incisor teeth it
($36
is just and proper to award Rs. 10,000/– towards future
medical expenses and it is awarded.
13. The Tribunal has rightly rejected gof
Rs.75,708/– towards damages for damageeausedtitto
Vehicle on the ground that hemdgot if’
Rs.61,129/– from the Ins:urane4e__C;’ornpan;yj.Atowiard.s~~hills’
and final settiement of “damage
caused to his vehicle _.and’ -:t4h_e1*~ep is ‘Vnodseope for
enhancement under
14. Thus. Ifor the foilowing
comvpensationz
:3″ i p Pain and”‘s_t1’fferings Rs.25.000/–
ii] V”Iedi–cai._&’*~incidenta}
s expenses Rs. 5,000/-
‘ Loss of amenities Rs.10,000/–
‘»__iV) Loss of income during
up period Rs. 10.000/~
‘,v.]–‘_” ‘Future medical expenses Rs.10,0OO/–
” Total Rs.60.000/–
VA accordingly the appeal is allowed part. The
judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the
extent stated hereinabove. The ciainiant is entitled for
&%
a totai compensation of Rs.60,000/– as against
Rs.3£,760/~ awarded by the Tribunal with interest at
6% p.a. on the enhanced compensation of /-
from the date of claim petition till ”
reaiisation.
16. The Insurance Company i4s..Adi1-ected»’.t.Q
enhanced compensation 28,240/”>e–.t0ge:ther with
interest within two’ df teceipt of a
copy of this judgmeintia.nd’V._Vthe ordered to be
released in ?_fav}i1u’r of the “e1aifn.ant’; ‘-
N0 Older as t0.4e0st. —
Sd/-
fudge