I
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 267" DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2010
PRESENT
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.PATIL
AND I I I A
THE HONBLE MRJUSTICER.s.KE-MR.A;:~:NAj _:"
M.F.A.NO.2813/2OO6{MX»?ufi ' 4' '
M.F.A.NO. 15m/k2ooe {1'\/mg
M.F.A.No.2813/2oo6(Mv) A O I
BETWEEN:
MISS.S_ANAM};fAIN__ _ ;
AGED A_BOUT1_9'Yf£ARS"=._. " _
D/o.MR :
AND:
MISSSANAM JAIN
D /O.SRI KANTHILAL H
AGED ABOUT 2I.fTEARS'
R/O NO 30. ~R_'LO_ORW
BANGALORE 7» 560 'O31 ...RESPONDENT
[BY SMT.ANITR_A RAVINDRAN M ADV.)
. TI?fIS:..I~.r1I:A..IS FILEDUNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
,A'GAINS_'I'vIHEJUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.07.2005
_PAS_SE2D"-._1N~ NO.2480/2002 ON THE FILE OF THE
METROPOLITAN AREA, BANGALORE.
(SC(__3H~20).*AWARDING COMPENSATION OF $452,000/A
WITH INTEREST @ 8% RA. ON ?4.42.000/-- FROM THE
_ 7.__DATE OF":PETITION TILL PAYMENT.
IIVTHESE APPEALS COMI G ON FOR FINAL HEARING
.._T;3IIS--FDAY. N.K.PATIL 0.. DE ERED THE FOLLOWING»
2
........__.___.....a-
JUDGMENT
These two appeals are by the claimant analthe
Corporation arising out of the same impugned;’j’udg3i_i;ei1__f
and award in MVC No.2480/2002 date:1,.A’,f’3o.9?j;2,ool?5~
passed by the Member, MACT,
Metropolitan Area, Bangalore.
2. The brief facts of the are : it ”
The claimant elVai.:ras_ a–ge_el”*.ab0ut 17 years,
studying in I PUC andvpshewas. healthy prior to
the ace_Tider1t.a’ at about 4.15 pm. on
residenclyroad, Heart Girls High School,
Bangalore, When”the’ claimant was proceeding as a
i:<1_Va Motorcycle bearing N0.KA»05~EG 9312,
the KSRTC bus bearing No.KA~01~F'~ 1769
V _ droife the 'vehicle in a high speed and in a rash and
».rnarr1.ner," so as to endanger human life. dashed against
theiltnotorcycle, due to which, the Claimant fell down
Ema the rear wheel of the bus ran over the hip of the
Claimant, thereby, she sustained grievous injuries such
as :m /
g 7
y
1'»
4
“Abrasion on the anterior aspect of the
right’ thigh, lacerated wound on the anterior
aspect of right ankle. perineal laceration with_____
displace urethra from pubic bone, right lateral
vagina tear extending on to freshet and
fracture of displacement of inferior L” l
right pubic bone, fracture of’sup.eriour
right pubic bone and fraciti.’_r’:et~ofzlatjerai
malleolus of right fibula? ..__ ‘V
On account of the infuripes “sustained, she was
admitted in the ‘of 33 days as
inpatient;”ev0ut’i.of.’ii%hich.l:>s–h’e ICU for 14 days and
she und_er32;reI1t: it is the further case of
the clairnantl ihatcshel has spent considerable amount
“V.__t0wafds._prnedicaI”expenses, conveyance, nourishing food
and charges and has lost one academic year.
“,{‘P1e”discorn’jf:}:rts and unhappiness caused due to the
‘v.,pdisabilityi. on account of the injuries sustained persist
“ilth.rou_gh0ut her future life and it affects her marriage
prospects and further, she has to take medical
treatment throughout. her life. ‘faking these relevant
aspects. she filed the claim petition under Section 166
of the M.V.Ac~.t claiming <:~.on1pe1'1sai:ion against the
ZMWHMHMM
3
Corporation. The said matter had come up for
consideration before the Tribunal and the Tribunal after
assessing the oral and documentary evidence and other
material on file, allowed the claim ;3etitioIji”””inVV”~ _
awarding compensation of 31,52,000/~ t_:;n–deif~..diiferer1t:it
heads with interest at 6% par’
petition till realisation. Bdeing the
quantum of compensation, preferred
the appeal-MFA28 l 3 2f)’O6 the Corporation
claiming that the vTrlbur1a1:’has_&’erredVeiiriv” not fixing the
COI1tI’ib:i}tO§’y’ I1végi1’igeiic’e’li.oii..the rider of the motor cycle
and the q;;anu§;m”” eonipenseitiion awarded by the
Trib.r;1.§na1i’is onvvhigher side, has filed the appealwlViFA
i:2i§7Q/2oo5,:a_
x..’*–.i3.x.V’aTlf1eA[:=.”learned counsel for the Claimant
‘tvvehenieiiielyd submitted that the Tribunal erred in not
A Qzawarding reasonable comperisation towards injury, pain
and suffering. Conveyance, nourishing food and
“.attendant charges, loss of amenitties. future medical
expenses and marriage prospects and not awarding any
compensation towards of e<;lucation for one
é
(3
academic year. She has taken us through the evidence
of the doctors PWS 2 and 3 wherein the disability to the
Claimant is stated as, 28% to the right: lower 1imvb;a',__32%
to the pelvic portion and 30% to the whole boofy,' g
Tribunal has assessed the whole body
claimant at 20%. She further .'
Claimant is a young bright at
the time of accident and Ori:2V'¢;¥il(:'C)\L1I1t.h'01%l_:'th€ VfiiI1_jL11'i€S
sustained, she is _a'iposition;«tgo'rlead a satisfied
married life as. there"'wo:u1d'*" in getting
conCeit'_ed–. delivery. Though the
material on i'evcoi'd'revea'_.l the above said problems, the
Trib1in1a1~ has 'neither. considered. nor appreciated nor
'a:Wa1'ded*ju«sVt""a_nd reasonable Compensation. Therefore,
that the judgnient and award of the
Triblnnala is liable to be modified. awarding just and
A .. f » reason able Compensation.
4. As against this, the leamed counsel for the
Corporation, interalia, sL1b1nitt’ed that”: the Tribunal has
Committed grave error in not fasiei’ii1’1g the contributory
negligence on the driver ofizhe motor cycle and erred in
1/ fl_W_H__”,__i.__,….
7
fastening the entire liability only on the Corporation.
Further. he submitted that the Tribunal is not justified
in awarding compensation towards the head loss of
future income. since the question of a'<2_'v"ar_'Cii_Ii'g
compensation under the said head does-'.'':r'1ot-._ar'ise;_'"1 "
However, he submitted that the :céoi11'pen:iati:on'l:a'warded'–wA
under the other heads are on i.heu'low-ear' sidieiarid it
be considered in accordance Wiytliiylaw. '
5. After careful c’0nsideratiorl ofathe submission of
the learned counsel appe.ariiigl’ir§n__.li§oth.,nsi.des, the only
point that -.ariSe'” for A consicderatioii is,
“Wh’et._hler the aqu”a_n’_i:un1 of compensation awarded
_ by the ;l’ribu11al”jHust., and reasonable?”
“1”‘i1.:e””occurre11ce of the accident, the disability
caused Vdue-. totlie injuries fsustained by the claimant
are not in dispute. It emerges from the records that the
claimant was aged about 17 years. studying 1 year PUC.
‘ She was in the hospital for 33 days inpatient. out of
which 14 days she was in ICU and underwent three
surgeries. Doctor has assessed disability at 28% to the
right lower limb, 32% to the pelvic portion arid 30% to
% ,_…..~»–»——-*’–“”
8
the whole body. The ‘E’ribunal has rightly assessed the
whole body disability at 20% and we accept the same.
The income assessed by the Tribunal at $300/–
also just and reasonable. The claimant
spent considerable amount towards med_.i.ca,1_:”e;{pe’nses,’ ”
conveyance. nourishing food and[attei:1df:;1ri–i.» .’
the permanent disability eat_i.sedV”oV_Ii” acco’iiifVit.i:<_vof jlthe
injuries sustained in the accit:ieiit.Vpers'ists'thraughout
her life. It has specifittalityclomie evidence of the
doctor-~PW8 as follows) tttt V
-. “Reset:-i: lexjamiiiiation done on
examination low
AiCiCCilTi4s'{;ilfl;Orl..7’Of”‘- lateral vagina wall,
present. In fliiure their
._COtLl”Ci”.._Ab:2’ dyspareriia during sexual
May require intermittent
dil_aiaVt§ori Qf vagina under anaesthesia and
Cofttintzoiis use of vaginal creams. Through
A «-the use of these measures sexual intercourse
“may be possible. May be associated with
lack of sexual sensation. Vaginal stenosis
mcii; be hazardous to vaginal [normal
delivery) disability to the extent Q1209/o.”
Ah.
£
9
7. The ‘I’ribunal has awarded just. and reasonable
compe1-1sai’ion towards medical expenses at 3’1 138,000/–
and towards loss of future income at ‘$1,253,000/V
therefore. we do not interfere with the same. l
8. ‘I’aki1’1g all tl1E’?S€’. reIeva1’1*:’: «into ll
cons1’de1*atio11._ we deem it just and 1::-1°o;9Jerl’ee.t.o-.av~Jarel._t.1″1eeA
COI’l’1p€1’3Sal.i0I1 as follows :
1.ToWa1’ds pain and s2;fi’e1″lf1gs’- AV ” 1,00,000/–
2.Towards ? 1,638,000/–
3. TowardsllCo;9£Vf;ef,}éiI1ce;’Cijvol1i:?l.$hll’og”food 3:’ 25,000/–
and;1tVtver1’ci;1ht<r:;l1Varges__" " 3'
4. Towends mes v:3f_.fult,u1″e_meome on ? 1,29,000/-
aceoL_t–_1_1t’ of ciis2i’i:\jlit_§_I”_–.___
5. Towa1’dlSe<_lo:aVS of ed.u(:21f¢iV()g__ ? 25,000/~
V72 7,' "1'owa_1'tlS' «E
6. To}.Va.rds ltmjs o.fvamle11i”ties, ? 50,000/–
d.is-3eon1I”o1″1s 3:3dv_u11_hap})i11ess
liiva,.1_re medical e;s:Mpe1’1ses 3:’ 50,000/»«
M8} mar1″iage prospects 3 30.000/-
Total ? 5.77,ooo/-
~–l”ln all. the elai.ma11t: is entitled to a total
we-o§mpe1’3sation. of ‘?’5.7’7.00()/~ as against. ?’4,52,000/-.
The e1’1l’1a¢1I’1(‘.e(:l <:<)n1p :i<)1'1 comes to $125,000/–
10
which (?ar1’ies interest” at 6% pa from the date of the
petition till realisation.
9. So far as the specific submissioii of the learned
Counsel for the Corporation regaretiing fiXii1g–i_h”‘~t.heA’
contribuiiory negiigeiirxe on the part of the ”
motor cycle. is concemed. he po-iri’te.d« (nit; t4hat’4d’ue.f,to’~..
the rash and iiegiigeiii. driving by the
cycle. accident has (‘)(§CL11’F€Cl_ K arid ti’1i._s ‘ as’p5ecE’tV oi” the
matter has neither be.ei1…1c)ok.e’d’ 3’1-f)1′ appreciated nor
considered by the Tribu it
Ai’iie1V’v and the documentary
evidence l’i’if_”)1″(‘.V})EiI’tit’i.1i’Eli:I5§v’ the evidence of PWS 1 and 4
and,..e:iwa.rds the smiiiherri side i.e. iefi. side and it
7%
WWHW
11
came in com.ac.t with the motor cycle and thereby
Caused the a0cicie11′:’. The Corporation has not produced
any material to disbelieve the same. However,___ the
contents of the doc~uI11eni;s perta1’m’1i1g to
No.10.’-3/O2 oi’Asl1ol<1'1age11' police station '
version of PWS 1 and -4:. Chalrgesheet .hasv4"b–eeri' V
against. the driver of the <')f'fer1di1i"gVb::.§s'.$ laefefore;
Tribunal has 1-ightly a(%(?epteCl.__f32I._e evide1'1'0e ajduC'a1ViC:'ed'V on
behalf of the claimant: z.»-mcl 1"e_§e(:"{ée'cl– the e\rideI.1ceAv'of RW1,
driver of the offending bigs. "-.V.l1§:1'e_fo:5e,'interference by
thie cc)i:J._1'1. 1'1otfl:a,1A1'&:C1'f'o3;\.'"–.. '
11.. ‘F§’:o1* lfl’l€’. 1’easor1s, the appeaI–MFA
2813,§{l2()oC)€5 11:30 the c1a1jmaI1t. is allowed in part. The
imp.1;g_n,0c=1_juvfiig;;1foe11t emd award of the ‘I’r1’bu.r1ai in MVC
No$480’/ii’002~§;;”timed 30.7.2005 is hereby modified. The
. clalni’-31110′-«VAis'”.e:1t,;11.lecl to the e;.’1I’1anceci eompe1’1sat1’on of
with im.e1*11 in addilitm. to the compensation
ll ” :1-Wa1*dec1 by the ‘l’1*ibu.n21I.
‘l’l’1e a’.1[)pe.a§–M.1?A 1570/2006 filed by the Corporation is
dismis:se(:l. fé
-fr
The Cc;n’porat.i()1′: is dire(tted to dep0$Vit:,_ tehe
enhanced compe11sa1.1’on of 31.25000/~ with kit
6% p.21. from the date of the petition _.1:~ii~1..”
Within {“c)m* weeks from the c1;.1_1t.e I AA
Certified copy ofthis_j11dg1′”:’1e:it-..;§V1’1(iAéi=.V’:§{1’rtlV. A
50% of the e;.11’Ia11eve'(:§.’ »:. with
proportio1″1ate im.erest’: deposit in
the name of athe nationalised
bank/sC}’1ec.i_;.1l§eei of five years
renewalV3V_i_e_Vb y’~
The rena:a>1i11i1″1g.,§.5096-.oi’7 t.»h’e_Te’nhanee(:1 Compenwtion
llfbée released in favour of
with pro1:)<31"Tio11a'te__i_111_;e19esi." aha
the _elai111a11:1179«: immecliat "e-!.y_;:1 deposit by the Corporation.
‘:{~’\1e1iov_1’}.1o ‘£1e”posi.t shall be transmitted to the
‘ Tribunal’ –_{‘($1’~thwi’1″.}5;’g -. V
‘Office to eiajexxir the award acc.ordi11gly.
Sd/5
JUDGE
Sé/5
JUDGE
I’S