IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY or OCTOBER, 201
: PRESENT :
TI-IE HON'BLE MR. JUSTIQE N.K,. Q . "
AND
THE fiON'BLE MR. J'£ar's'1f_1cEV'1+:,s'.3s<1=:1\*:»1¥A;_\.§d1:'v_zix "
M.F.A.NO. 9922vd'oTf'20Vo6 '
Between: =
B.Shankar ._ x
8/0. Sri. Ba1akriAshnappa,.» _ '
Aged 44 years, I "
499, 6"' Cross, I M3111, "
Gokui ' »
Yeshwanthpxurg u '
Banga.3o1"e -.22".;.
-- Appellant
{By S1'i".. Vishnu.D;'B%hat.VAdvoe::ite)
And:
1 .v ~ Divisions! T Manager
"=Uni--tted Endia Insii1*a.nce C0,, Ltd.,
_D.o.4,~.No. 19/194,
Vt Road; ~Ba_}.3avanagudi,
'-Banga1vo_re;4.
2 'S11 Nelson Ra]
No.38, Marisanjujeevappa Lane,
n .T J.p';Nagar,
3 V' , _ Banga1ore--78.
... Respondents
{By Sri. B.C.Seetha Rama Rao, Advocate for R1:
R2 – Notice dispensed with v/o dated 26/08/2009]
lx)
=I<****=l=
This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act, agavinlstrthe
Judgment and Award dated: 13/02/2006 passed in
1951/2000 on the file of the 1 Addl. SCJ, Member',-.l.i»'£A€T,
Metropolitan Area, Bangalore [SCCH–11], partlyaliowiiig ' 4_
claim petition for compensation and seeking .er1k1_anVce§ne.nt of "
compensation.
This MFA coming on £5:
N.K. PATIL. J ., delivered the ,fol.l_oWing:_
__J U DCili/1 EN T.”
This appeai by against the
impugned juudgrnent ll13’h February
2006, by the 1
Additional . 31 3:, as ‘l Accident Claims
‘Fribun”al,”‘lBanga1ore (SCCHa1 1], (for
short, ‘Tribunal’ 3~_for’len~l1ancement of compensation on
….. the compensation of ?3,35,50O/A
aW’ard”ed” _ii1Vl’ his favour as against his claim for
is inadequate.
The appellant claims to be aged about 38
and a Police Constable by profession, drawing
aialary of ?’5,926/– per month. He was hale and healthy
prior to the date of accident. That at about 9:30 P.M.,
on 2004-2000, when the appellant was going slowly
and cautiously on his motor cycle bearing No.MYY–8984
on the left side of Sankey Road, at that time, an
Ambassador Car bearing No.CAK–~896 came in
and negligent manner at high speed
Grounds side and dashed againstthe motor’eyelbeof’-tphftr ”
appellant. Due to the impact, he
vehicle and sustained fracture-._injuries anciasi abbresult –. 0′
of the same, his right great toe__wa,s amputated.
3. It is the case of he has spent
considerable. by tunoiirzt towards” ‘ ‘conveyance, nourishing
food andattendant”~<:hargesV_.including medical expenses
and other incidental e:_x;pe'nses, and has taken treatment
"'.for V-la'b0.u»:t the Hospital and sustained
towards limb and 40% in respect of
Wholue But. the Tribunal seriously erred in not
3'~.__l'awardin.gl1' any compensation towards loss of income
A treatment period. disability and future medical
_eXpenses and therefore, he has to be Compensated
%.,–»–»-~*'"'"
3′
I
reasonably by modifying the impugned judgment and
award passed by Tribunal.
4. On account of the injuries sustainedfin
accident, the appellant filed thlewclaim7.pe:tition_V
Section 166 of the Motor _’Vehi’eles Actf,be’fore’;.AtheV’g
Tribunal, seeking compensatiori of a~._surr1 €10.00
lakhs against the resp_o’g;1dents..’sA petition
had come up for cons.id:eration:_ Tribunal on
139; February _V’:1’«he,_ after considering the
relevantllni-aticrrialiifavailablle and after appreciation
of theVoral._andVdoeuinentagy evidence, allowed the claim
petition a sum of 33,35,500/– with
at A60/oAV’per——–annum from the date of petition till
:.4of:::r=ealisation. Being dissatisfied with the
‘compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the
appellant is in appeal before this Court, seeking
enhancement of compensation.
%W
fl
S. We have heard learned counsel for appellant
and learned counsel for Insurance Company for
considerable length of time.
6. After hearing learned coi1»nsel_.’ft)’r” ‘*
and after perusal of the judgment’ a;f_id..
Tribunal including the original ,records placledA~».l;_je.fore us,
we are of the View that, the after’ asse_sEsing the
oral and documentary 7§w1d¢ri~¢e: on file, has
awarded ju.st.:l’ .and:_”Mrea,sonab.le 3 compensation of
?so,ooo/4 ar1d~- sufferings; ?1,95,5oo/-
towards ll $20,000/~ towards
conveyance», no1i1*ish–i:ng~–“lood and attendant charges and
‘l V’ a ?.40,000f*-~–«towards loss of amenities. Hence, it
does c.:-:l1,_t’o;~ interference.
“?’V_._l* However, the Tribunal grossly erred in not
i’ awarding any compensation towards loss of income
‘A .. _..during treatment period, disability and towards future
medical expenses. The appellant was impatient in the
%W
J’
6
Hospital for about 69 days and it has come in the
evidence that he has taken follow~up treatment
rest and has not attended duty for about .
Therefore, he is entitled for cornpernsationll’for’_jthe ll”
period. The monthly salary
?5,926/- and for three mor1th’sV_%it oo:n_es_toA?”:1;’7;w7V7’8/A. * it
By rounding off the sarne, we-~award–~..a sum of {$50,000/–
towards loss of ,LE-prgriod.
8. ‘disability at 80%
towards body. Further,
the skin grafting and
underwen’t.l_ right great toe, which is a
perrna_ner1t”disabilitygand he has to live with it for the
i,.’his’v~- life. ‘”‘”l’a’l<ing all these aspects, the Tribunal
.__o'ught = Virave awarded reasonable compensation.
award a sum of ?'75,000/~ towards
9. Further, having regard to the nature of injuries
nature and duration of treatment, he may require
further treatment and incur future medical expenses.
A
/ ___”_WM_..,,.,
Therefore, we award a sum of 3310.000/– towards future
medical expenses.
10. In the light of the facts and .
the ease, as stated above, the appeal if”
is allowed in part. The impugned
dated ism Februaryih:a_;20o’e3,tp§ mi’ ”
M.V.C.No.1 95 1 / 2000.,» the-*1′ additional”SC,.I.,..vi§/Iember,
Motor Accident Clairns :3/Ietiaopolitan Area.
Bangalore awarding a
sum of r4:r’4of;5c§er;*tett t:1S:-.j2:.~t.f,Aa–iI_i$§;tV’?b3,35,5OO/– awarded by
Tribun”a1′[‘ ag’~p-8%; P31″ amlnum 011 the
enhaneed sum; of petitlon till the date of
realizatiorrfl» The’ i–3re’ab’k’–‘up is as follows:
and sufferings
? 80,000/–
TQW&1=–‘Ci:3.Vi = of amenities & ? 40,000/–
“fin. IQ . V75? IE!’ _i1’1,.HJfe
Towards. Medical Expenses $1.95 ,500/ —
food and attendant charges
Towards Vconveyanoe, nourishing ? 20,000/–
if Towards Loss of earning during ? 20,000/–
_ ” ;trea.tmer:t period
Towards disability ? 75.000!-
i -mg-i’owards future medicai expenses a ? 10,000/–
Tatal ?4,40,500/ –
74..,..a….».»~
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
enhanced compensation of ‘\’1,05,000/–, with interest
thereon at 6% per annum, Within four weeks frorriéjllthe
date of receipt of copy of the judgment and pr. _
On such deposit by the ln’sur:an..ce
of the enhanced compensation of ;,i._5«{)9[o of ‘
with proportionate interest :sha;l’1.._bc_vpdepositedwyin Fixed
Deposit in any Nationlalise-*d” Bank, in the
name of they of five years,
renewable forVanother”fiye- years, with permission to him
to withdravy l’thellperiodic’a.l interest.
50% of the enhanced compensation
interest shall be released in favour of
‘ . V the immediately.
it = Office to draw award, accordingly.
//
/
‘WWMMWWWM.
:5
9
Sri.B.C. Seetharamarao, learned Counsel is
permitted to file Vakalath on behalf of first respondent,
within four weeks from today.
BMW’ H