\\.'\:
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 207"" DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010
PRESENT
THE HONELE MR. JUSTICE N.K.PA'}.'IL 5 A
AND _ A
THE HON'BLE MRJUSTIOE A A
M.R.A.RO.93/2o65(:mjjA
BETWEEN: A
DRCHANDRIKA RAO
WEFE OF SR1. '
AGED ABOUT 3'912§EAR_S',= ~ _
REs1DING'A--TV1'~iO. 1 N1'1;AYA.
H.B.S}aMA,JAR{}AD';'wA = '
BASAVANAGUDI, BANG-
Q 560 004... APPELLANT
{BY sR1.E A/1ASs11,AMAN':'I . _ _
BY MANAGER ,VRESpONDENTS
(BY M/S M.N.NEHRU & ASjSOCIATES~--I«f-OR.R~2,
SRLVISHWANATH S .,'~ ?AD\(. 'FOR' R3.
SRI.MU.POONACHA ~-- ADV.'--FO.R R»~5,'r 1 ~
NOTICE TO - 'V1 PENSED WITH
V/O DATED 17'.V-3B_,A2GQ'z}_C_'~----_, ' -
TIIISw--CI'\'/IIPA IS F'IVLEI5-IINDER SECTION 173(1) OF' MV
ACT AGAINST" 'JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
1I.oSj.2'0o5 PASSED IN MVC NOA757/2001 ON THE FILE
ADDL. SCJ & MEMBER, MACT,
METROPOL-I'I'A.N AREA, BANGALORE, (SCCH-17}, PARTLY
TALLOWING CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND_ SE'ENING.'VENE;ANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING
1_TI~11S DAY: N.K.PATIL J., DELIVERED THE EOI,1,,OwING:~
JUDGMENT
This is cIairnant’S appeal for enhancement Of
compensation against the impugned judgment and
award dated 1I.8.2005 assed in MVC NO.4757/2001
_#_M_M_,,I,,.,.
3
on the file of the XIX Add}. SCJ 8: Member, MACT.
Metropolitan area, Bangalore (SCCH–17), [hereinafter
referred to as ‘Tribunal’ for short).
2. By its judgement and award, the Tribunaidiiasé
awarded a sum of $220,000/~ with interestxeit
from the date of petition till reaiisation ‘as:
claim made by the appeliant for of
on account of the injuries su’;-stainedby_her:.’infl”t:hVe”road
traffic accident. Beinggaggrietfedii}:-tfthe judgment
and award, the appellant this appeal
seeking I ground that. the amount
awarded by! the inadequate.
‘In»brief,”‘ the facts of the case are:
claims to be aged about 35 years. a
in M.S.Ramaiah I-iospitai, getting
‘V sa1ar3r..of§15,OOO/– p.m., after deducting profession tax
income tax. She was hale and healthy prior to the
‘ That, at about 9.20 am. on 14.5.2001, when
was driving the Marathi car bearing No.KAO4–N–
2897 on C.V.Rama% road, near Indian Institute of
4
Science Main gate, at that time, a water tanker bearing
N0.KA–l7–3828, driven by its driver in high speed and
in a rash and negligent manner, Came from oppolsite
direction and dashed against the Maruthi ca:’;”‘*iD.f_ale_l’ito:4_ _
which, the appellant sustained grieyous it
car was totally damaged. Immediately,,lshe’–yifa.s”‘take-n
M.S.Rarnaiah hospital, Bang.alore,’~._ yvherej’si*ieVV
treatment for about 2 monthsand inpatient,
and undergone a surgeI–‘y’.g71’ll2e examined the
appellant has _i’–stated”‘ “that ” it disability of
shortening :i’owerT’iimb by 1 cm and as a result of
Which, disability to the extent of
23%.,§,ggTa}:ing all factors, the appellant filed a claim
the Tribunal claiming compensation
reslpondents. The said claim petition had
.q come upvgforllllconsideration before the Tribunal, which in
ll,ftur”Ii,n after hearing both sides and after assessing the
documentary evidence, has allowed the said
it petition in part and awarded a sum of ?3,10,0GO/~
as compensation uncigifferent heads with interest at
‘M___W__#_W,__,,…
5
6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of
realisation. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and
award, the appellant has presented this appeal, sgeehlting
enhancement of compensation.
4. The learned senior counsel appea.r.iriglfr.§:r._tng”‘
appellant submitted that the Tribunaiclgghalsg .l
awarding just and reasonab-ie conipensat.ion5 .t_owa_irds
pain and suffering, conveyance,» nourishing food and
attendant charges, loss Vfof’ ‘amjeni’t*ie’sQdisconiforts and
unhappiness and loss.-of.fi1ture:_ine’oIrie.”on account of
the injuries the appellant in the road
trafiic accident. Te’ stiihsltantiate his submission that
the , fifrlbiinal not awarded compensation towards
‘of income, he has relied upon the judgment
aim Court in Civil Appeal No.’7223/2010,
–V arising of SL1′ (Civil) No.1827/2010, dated
;a_20li0 (Yadava Kurnar — Vs »– The Divisional
Manager, National Insurance Co.Ltd 8: Another] and
it submitted that the Apex Court has held that, if grievous
injuries are sustag, the court must consider
____M___Hm__W,_,_,,._i..
L
regarding granting of compensation towards loss of
future income based on the percentage of disability
suffered and not the occupation which the V
doing earlier.
5. As against this, the 1e;a1¥:iec1«
third respondent~insurer, _intera’iia;’-._ contendect and V’
substantiated the judgment the
Tribunal as just and this
Court is not called for_a_s’,’ assessing
the oral and taking into
considerationpw’ithe.,_age”arid__ occupation of the appellant,
has reasonable compensation.
I-Ie ~ submitted that reasonable
.compen’sation..,, as per law, may be awarded towards
coIi1reya11c’e–._ nourishing food and attendant charges and
-V loss” of amenities, discomforts and unhappiness.
‘::e»..F’urther: as the Tribunal has not awarded any
compensation towards future medical expenses,
“”V.V.r’easonabIe compensation may be awarded under the
said head also, in accordance with law.
%
‘E/I
7
7. However, he vehemently submitted that the
question of considering the compensation payable
towards loss of future income on account of disability
does not arise in the instant case as the appei1–ant__’__ha_s”
been continued in service and has been pron1_otVed.:as_ an ”
Asst. Professor in
promotional benefits inclusive-.of increase ir:-.*her,sva1a_i;y.Vl
8. After having heard’-.the._e rivahvcontentions
canvassed on both es the material
availablewon. Airiecord-“* and’-also the impugned judgement
and award,_ the lpoints. _.ti1aL_. arise for our consideration
are:–__
v-fl’\Mh;ethAer the””‘co’mpensation awarded is just and
the Tribunal was justified in not
awarding compensation towards loss of future
rt.-‘income’?
9. Re. Point No.1 :– The appellant claims to be
V aged about 35 years, working as an Asst. Professor in
M.S.Ra1naiah Hospita , getting salary of €15,000/~ p.rn.,
MWMM
8
after deducting profession tax and income tax. She has
taken treatment for about 2 months and 12 days as
inpatient and undergone a surgery. The docto.rV_vii’7ho
examined the appellant has stated _
disability of shortening of right Iogvgerg 1imb”‘by*:i: ”
as a result of which, she has
to the extent of 23%. It is thegease the that
due to the injuries sustained_..Ioyv.her in .th’e.1foa,d traffic
accident, she is not carry on her
profession effectively {as prior to the
accident suffer the discomforts and
unhappinessii throu”ghou’t.i.nher life. She has to undergo
one surgery forrernoval of implants inserted and
to _Viricou.r”e,Xpenses towards the tentative cost of the
incidental expenses. Taking these
‘V aspe’Cts””.ginto consideration the nature, duration of
“‘..js*..tre’atifnent taken by the appellant, pain and agony
‘ suffered by her and taking into consideration that she
“”v.,mrnight have spent considerabie amount towards
conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges, we
f~—–=—-mmrrr’
L
9
deem it proper to award ?60,000/– towards pain and
sufferings as against 315,000/–, ?2€),0O0/- towards
conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges as
against $15,000/-, €30,000/– (?15,ooo x 2II101’11’ri’.1′:-‘”§–V}V:VVtO.’44£g§’\?_?:1.Vi’€iS
loss of income during treatment period as against
?’80,000/– towards loss of amenities,
unhappiness as against ?40,000/Ppaiidi’
future medical expenses, to the .end.sVof ‘j~us’tiee:. The”?
Tribunal has awardedzjust reasonable “compensation of
?1,€)0,000/«~ towards andtherefore, it does
:0. ~ ~
iiearnedrp’ counsel for the appeilant has
conlterrded the appellant has to be awarded
. ‘oorripveiasation towards loss of future income on account
sustained by her in the road traffic
aocideVnt§’ “:’I’o substantiate his submission, he has relied
.. A’ upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Civii Appeal
i”gNo§7223/2010, arising out of s1.p (civii) No.1827/2.010,
dated 31.8.2010 [Yadava Kumar —- Vs —- The Divisional
Manager, National ranC€ Co. Ltd 53: Another) and
10
submitted that the Apex Court has held that, if grievous
injuries are sustained, the court must consider
regarding granting of compensation payable
loss of future income based on the percentage..
disability suffered and irrespective» of tiie'”-occupa’tiVonu ‘*
which the claimant was doing ear’i_ier;:””i .. :5 A
11. However, the facts:__’in_ that ease”.are._’~enti–re1y
different. The clajrnant therein”w..was ‘ a..paA1’_€’1ter by
profession and on acco’un–t ‘injuries sustained in
the road traffi€::V’acci(j1ent’ V~toi”his permanent
disability, __ he’d-‘is:_not’v.in-.,___a- position to continue his
professionapand this.VA’1eIei{ant factor has been borne in
_ minci§”byi.the has held that, in the facts and
the case, the Tribunals and the High
‘CourtsvV”}1Vé1_ve’*ptVo consider to compensate the claimant
–V towardsripossi of future income. But, in the instant case,
‘:j.as’irightiy pointed out by the learned counsel for the
* insurer, as the appellant has been continued in service
it promoted as an Asst. Professor, she will have been
given promotional benefits which comprises of increase
%uW
L
11
in her salary would go to ciearly indicate there is no loss
of income. Therefore, the question of loss of income
does not arise. Taking this relevant factoijVo».in.to
consideration, we are of the considered view:”.t1’1’a_t~—..the___ _
contention of the learned senior» couns’e»1-jlfthat he ” it
appellant should be compensatedpitowaifds’ .’
income cannot be accepted.»an_d therefore,
the Tribunal was justified not any
compensation towards loss’ fnftiire.’pinco.rne.
12. Accordingly, Ztiie» afppvealtp_isl.’a1lowe’d in part and
the award passed by the
TribunaiAin:t»wc’v.Na4?5’7c/éloo1 dated 11.8.2005 stands
modiffpiedel,. a: compensation of ?3,10,000/«~ as
awarded by the Tribunal. The
l’enh.anc’ed”_”_v»cotripensation comes to ?90,000/– which
–V carries interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the petition
V V ‘ j ti11’lre.alisation.
The third respondentwinsnrer is directed to deposit
enhanced compensation of ?90,000/– with interest
at 8% p.a. from the die of petition till the date of
./ ,r,Mm»~~–»—~-~»~
£
12
reaiisation, within four weeks from the date of receipt of
the copy of this judgment and award.
The entire enhanced compensation of ?€3_Q.,v_Oé’)_:'().,_/–
with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of a.
realisation shali be reieased in favour 0f’the* RV’
immediately, on deposit by the
Draw the award, aceoittiingiy.