1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 207"" DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010,»
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.FiAEP11{':I/i " '
THE HONELE MRJUSTICEITS';VKE§&4,AF:%.NNAA;:\\/D113,I.
M.E.A.No;10e8
BETWEEN:
NVENKATESH _ 5
s/0 HANUMAN'I'HAPPA* _ _ --
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS -- _ i
RETIRES POLICE HEAD' 'CO§$ISTAB_LE ; I "
RESIDENT .BIIIIC}I-OD--_'CIRCIIE
I'
TALUK'& DIS'FR1C.T.
cH1TRADU_RGA.'_ " APPELLANT
(By.%fǤ"R1L.~sHANTA'EIjA;;'ADV. FOR SRI.B.M.SIDDAPPA --ADV.]
' .__S/OV.RAJ_ANNA
'A<3ED;'29 YEARS
OVVNER OF DORRY BEARING
AA .,No.'KA-03/A»2:36o,
, _ RESIDENT OF BUDHIGERE
" VILLAGE, DEVANAI"-IALLI
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED ,
ENKAY COMPLEX,
KESHAWAPUR. HUBLI ...RESPONDENTS
%/
(BY SRI.A.M.VENKATESH--ADV. FOR R2,
R--1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED]
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 'T:f3(:A}V.:OE'
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND ;A'vVARD"~.VDA'1'E}D"~
23.12.2004 PASSED IN MVC No.77?'/'19.99-_tON.THE EILE OE
THE LEARNED ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE :AND"---MEM_EEa,
MACT-11, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY? ALLOWING 'C_'l'.AI1V'.f_
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION " AND" .__s_flEE;K1NC_*.
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. " A
THIS APPEAL cOM1NQ--------O'_N "FOR PINAL/HEARING
THIS DAY, H.s.KEM~PAN=NA:. 7 "DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:-- .
=
This for enhancement
of Compenaatienh tltfiaet injuries sustained by
him in a __ — t
‘F,O1″- the p”u:rpOSe4’Of Convenience, parties would
begrdefetrred “tO..V_VVa’s they are referred to in the Claim
the Tribunal.
2 Jtacts of the Case are :-
..1″he.’}detiti0ner as On the date of the accident was
as a pOIiCe head Constable earning ?6,756/~
On 11.11.1998 at about 4.30 arm. while he was
Won duty On N .I-1.4 in front Of Bharmasagara poiice
station, the lorry bearing Reg.No.KA-03/A–2360, driven
<='i\»//
3
by its driver at a high speed in a rash and negligent
manner came and dashed against the petitioner to
which he sustained grievous injuries. Imrriediately
was shifted to Chigateri General Hospital;.1:’Dai¥angere””
and from there to Bapuji hospital, forfbetter
treatment where he was admitted as an i°npattie.n.t–*for
period of 110 days. lie surgeries. Due
to the injuries ‘the road traffic
accident, he his functions
efficiently;Hence, he filed a
claim:’–,_ i -l the Tribunal claiming
compensation in of r5,oo,ooo/~ against the
responclents ”
-V 4lAg.’«C)’r1l:’se_rvice of notice, the first respondent, owner
“the rernained absent. Hence, he was placed
expartve, The second respondent–insurer appeared and
it contested the petition by filing objections. The insurer
in his objections, among other things, while admitting
the accident contended that, the accident that took
place was not on account of the rash and negligent
(WV
aw
4
driving of the driver of the offending lorry, on the other
hand it occurred due to the negligence of the petitioner
himself on account of his crossing the road__’4sd1Vjdder1-ly
and therefore, as the accident has not
to the negligence of the driver Varetnnot
liable to pay any compensation and”accor,din’gly’;
for dismissal of the petition.d”
5. The Tribunaldgon the eeidddd pleadings
raised four isfilles. I it
6. his case has got
himself and the Doctor who examined
him EXs.Pl to P17. The insurer
re,spondent didhot lead any evidence in support of their
a ‘A«l-lolvvever, they got marked the policy of the
id issued by them, as Ex.Rl.
z Tribunal, thereafter, considering the oral
it documentary evidence placed on record held that
Vfthe accident in question took place due to the rash and
negligent driving of the offending lorry by its dziver and
thereby the petitioner has established that the accident
av
5
has taken piace due to the actionable negligence of the
driver of the lorry. Further, the Tribunal looliinginto
the medical evidence on record, taking
the petitioner at 10% ~l6% and ”
record, awarded compensation ftow*ard.s
suffering at ?75,000/–, “tV_towards’~ L’
having regard to the bil1s,_…p:1fo.du–ced,.’ at__ ?-£0,000/–,
‘\*l5,000/– towards food and
attendant charges_, tojwaitds of amenities,
discomforts laild’ ?’10,000/- towards
,_’i’h~us, in all awarded a sum of
?1,7o,oo’o witl1_i’iiVte»re”s»t44at 6% p.a. from the date of the
petiff.ion~til1 reiahsatiogri.
8:v.’~7I’h.:e””petitioner being aggrieved of the quantum
it awarded to him has preferred the
present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
it The learned counsei for the appellant submitted
that the Tribunai has not awarded commensurate
compensation for the injuries sustained by the
petitioner in the accident and further it has aiso not
a\,/
awarded just compensation towards conveyance,
nourishing food and attendant charges, towards of
amenities, cliscomforts and unhapp.ine’ss,’ftowardsig
medical expenses for which he jj.prodii’ced’».1ried.ical ‘
bills. Hence, a case for enhancernent is V
10. Per contra, the the insurer
supported the it passed by the
Tribunal. i . V
11. theri:}a’l”submissions made
by ‘respective parties and
the the point that arises
for our ‘ 4 é :3
WE./Itether compensation awarded by the
Ttilaunatgtogpttiiep petitioner is just and reasonable?
are not in dispute. That the petitioner
havin’g,r’sustained injuries in the accident and the
v.””«.AaccitAient having taken place due to the negligence of the
.,_dEriver of the offending lorry are not in dispute. The
medical evidence on record discloses that the petitioner
has sustained a lacerated wound on the face near right
eye measuring 5 ems x 2 ems, suspected fracture.-of ribs
on right side, laeerated wound of right forearrn:..”upper
1/8 and elbow measuring 8 ems X 4 ems
fracture of right tibia upper I /S.””He in T
for nearly 110 days and unei’ergone .surge’ries.-up
Taking these aspects into e’oITisideration’;Agweéddeedm it fit
to award a further sum towards’ pain and
sufferings in addition /?,§\’.ol’a.iNarded by the
Tribunal. Fui’ther, ipwep Tribunal has
awarded ‘conveyance, nourishing food
and attendant.’e_hargesfi’»IfIa_ving regard to the period for
which in the and the nature of injuries
hegliass. suffe1’-eVd,V the treatment that he has taken, we
‘A.a–.:s-um of ?15,000/– more in addition to
awarded by the Tribunal under the said
head’. V”‘VFurther, the Tribunal has awarded only a sum of
— towards loss of amenities, diseomforts and
hdurdihappiness. As already pointed out, the petitioner has
sustained four injuries which comprises of fractures
and has underwent four surgeries and he was in the
.»v
“Ni/’
hospitai for 110 days. Taking these facts into
consideration, we are of the View that_’…fer_d~.._the
diseornforts and unhappiness he has
should be awarded ?10,000/hjuprnore teweseeeexees
amenities, diseomforts and unhappir1ess_inadditiofilito
?30,000/– awarded by the_v’Tribuna1:._ fdutureedd
medical expenses that has ‘awarded-at rate of
‘€10,000/– by the regard to the
evidence on it just and proper
and there’t’oi_’eV,1″e~deeds’-:_Vjno’t. _ for any enhancement.
Coming ._ toy’ihevdieal’expenses, though the petitioner
cIa1’ms’dth’a’t he ?1,42,366.76p as per bills
theV”eoV1:1:nse:1 for the insurer submits that there
. are some-.re-petitions in the bills. Hence, both counsei
~remydis{ibmpit’ted that a further sum of $40,000/~ be
addition to 340,000/– awarded by the
it » tribunal. Having regard to the same, we award a further
of ?”‘40,000/– towards medical expenses, there by
in all the petitioner is entitled to a compensation
?80,000/– towards medical expenses. Thus, in our view,
c5\}/
the petitioner is entitled to compensation _..___under
different heads as follows :-
1. Towards pain and suffering — ? l-l”
2. Towards medical expenses
3. Towards conveyance, n.oVurishin§–_lV_A.’ ». 2
food and attendant charges – V ?’?v_3Q,vO.QQ/:-
4. Towards loss of amenities_,__”-.__ K
discoinforts and u’nhappine’ssj4
I
%”4o;0hoo/-
5. Towards future _. __
expenses _ ” I ‘K’ 10,000/–
~ – 22,40,000/–
of -l ?2,40,000/- is awarded as
against”V-oft],7O,O0VO/giflawarded by the Tribunal. The
enhpahoed co’rnpeVnsa:’;ion comes to ?70,000/-.
A Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The
l’ ‘petitioner:..isc:=.Ventitled to the enhanced compensation of
/.§~xwith interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the
2 xpetitiori till realisation in addition to the compensation
‘awarded by the tribunal.
The insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced
compensation of ?70,000/– with interest at 6% p.a. from
10
the date of petition till the date of realisation, within
four weeks from the date of receipt of the
judgment and award.
Out of the enhanced corr1ppensa_tior1;:’j:5C”.-:3»«p.
accrued interest shall be invested’_”ifl;
any Nationalized or Schedolie-dV_banl:,:_in. of the’
another three years, to Withdraw the
interest accrfaed.on it, per’iodica}J.y. V’ ”
accrtced I released in favour of the
appellarit, deposit by the insurer.
‘Office to ‘the award, accordingly.
Sd/–
Judge
SCI/-3
Judge
I’S