Ishtiyak Ahmed vs Chandkhan on 18 February, 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CIRCUIT BENCI-IAT
DHARWAD. : 

DATED THIS THE 18th DAY OF FEBRUARY  " 
PRESENT lll 'll
THE HON'BLE MR.JUsT1c§E"1~T.AK.RAT1L' Hi  V
THE HON'BLE MR. JUS'l'ICvl*:V"z3l.S.Pl1\CH_H'A_l?'UVRé  3
Miscellaneous Fir"st_Appe'al   01; A2005" 
BETWEEN:  'A l 1 V   ll

Sri.Ishtiyak Al1mec:i--~_ ' _, 

S/ o. I-Iasansab H«_:jrs'u:kar 
Age:26 Yeargs",    _
R/o. New Ga:1cl..Z;*'_Naga'r,«.  «. l' V
Be1gaum;"~..  "*1; --  *

Talukaa; Dist':'lvBeIgau:m4.4v:V'"~.'__ _ ;  APPELLANT.

(By sri'; gx.'R,Pati_l,' Rafi)" 

 . S':-i.l_Chan:ik.han__

  Sync.' Sadnkhan 
;'&g"e:VTMajo1'f,«..O'Ce: Business
RA/'Q. KaVbi.rl'I'_sEagar, Tulasi Colony

-- Soot Naga1.',4Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
 OWne"1gO'i' Truck No: RJ-- 19/G--2001

4:  2, V' 'L:  The 'Divisional Manager

'National Insurance Co Ltd., D.().

K  Fiarndev Galli, Belgaum

M'



Taluk 85 Dist: Belgaum
(Insurer of Truck No. RJ -9/G--2001)

 RESPOiN:DENTS
(By Sri. Suresh S.Gundi, Adv.)    

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST A>§fPEAL'.;'S»..;§jLEID:: 
SECTION 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAIN'ST"TH1E..«JuDG:vIENT= AND ij

AWARD DATED:15.3.2O05 PASSED IN, M3'/'C.~NOI._1~2_53/2:OQ2ii.QN
THE FILE OF THE III ADDL.CIv1L_.JUDGE (S~R.DN.},8I-. ADDL;.,MACT.,e

BELGAUM, ALLOWING THE "'-PCLAIMV . _PETITION  FOR'

COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENH_AF€CEN£ENT OF
COMPENSATION.     

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST'APP~EAI;;IS'.COMING ON FOR
HEARING THIS DAY, S.ri';""'II.jH.PAfrI_L 'J.._, DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:    

4  .flDi_d1vI1':N?m 
This Waist' .ai  seeking enhancement of

compensation O:-I accdunt Of" the injuries sustained in a road

_~'acCidentiidirected agai1I---St«'the Common impugned judgment and

aw.ardVidated.4L15,/Q3/.2005 passed in MVC. NO. 1253/2002 on the

 er "HI Ad'§i1'j,V.'eCivi1 Judge(Sr.£)n.) and Member, A.M.A.C.T.

Vite...__4Be1.gaumi. ..'I;he Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award has

 Sum of Rs. 1,43,850/- with interest at 6% pa. The

%e.D



compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and __calls for

enhancement and hence this appeal.

2. The brief facts of the case are~

The appellant claimant is age;.imabout'i--,24;'  7. V

occupation he is an electric welder ea__rni.ng an'_»ii_ncome*:.'of.p 

5,000/-- per month. When thing'-Siigwstoodiih  
20/ 02/ 2002 when he was...procgeedin_g' io1:.._hisiilbic5;Q1ie from his
garage towards his houseiiafter work on the
extreme left side of .the_ V' following the
traffic rules and  'vtvhéniffgeicame near the spot of the
accident ne.ar--VSam_bra' at that time the goods
truck bearing '--Regi.i  came from Kakati side i.e.,

from opposite idi_rection_ diiiveniiby its driver in a rash and negligent

4'rnanner«1§:§rith~a high-speec1_in a zig zag manner by overtaking the

fronitivehiclve 'é1I1.(T"€laSh€d against the appellant, who was on his

bicy'c1_e','i._Voni"aecountiiof which he fell down and sustained multiple

ifracturenifinjuriesfiand immediately he has been shifted to K.L.E.

 Belgaum, wherein he was an inpatient and has

 unde.rgone treatment for one month and undergone one surgery

T and-"implant has been inserted. On ,account of the injuries



sustained in the road traffic accident he has filed a claim___petition

under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, seeking conipensation

against the respondent. The said claim petition  

consideration before the Tribunal, the,,,,T_ribu1f1al””iriftu’rn”.bygits»_

impugned judgment and award after i’o:’r’al”i’?1and

documentary evidence and otherrelevant-material i’or1.._r_¢Vcord has’

allowed the same in part awarding /- under
different heads. The said Tribunal is
inadequate and needs enha,n.ce.m.enit_i,iA& present appeal
is filed being and award

passed by the ‘

3. The V, principal :_ij,’suVbm”iss’ion canvassed by the learned

counsel for app’ell_ant..Tat the’: outset is that, the Tribunal has

:.’:commit’ted grave errormin awarding compensation only under

me.:1_ic’al,_u’e:§pe,nses__ and other incidental expenses, pain and

T V’-«’»su.fferii1gs, lQ.Ssii’of’iamenities and loss of income due to disability-

– not awarisling any compensation under loss of future medical

ex’pie_11.ses’;_i without taking into consideration the duration of

ii .t_reatment, pain and agony suffered by appellant and discomforts,

/

unhappiness throughout his life. Therefore, he submits that the

compensation awarded in the impugned judgment andzaward

passed by the Tribunal is to be enhanced by awardeiinug

reasonable compensation.

4. As against this, the learnedl*-counseililappearing for”

respondents, interalia, contended the ‘and award
passed by the Tribunal is neitjrist and does not call
for interference. The Tribunal the relevant
particulars on the aiv’iielaso’nable compensation.
However, the for appellant fairly
submitted enhancement in the award
having regard’ “to sustained, duration of

treatment, unhappinessand discomforts in accordance with law.

Aftcarefuil consideration of the submission made by

i it Lvlvearned counsel’ appearing for both the parties, the only point that

.. farises for our ieonsideration in the instant appeal is

“Whether the compensation awarded by
Tribunal is just and reasonable?”

//44/M

.1

I

6. After perusal of the impugned judgment and award

passed by the Tribunal, what emerges is that the Tribu-na’1._vhas

committed a grave error in not awarding reasonable §compe’n.sa’tion

towards pain and suffering, medical eXpen’sesu,:’conveyance;.

nourishing food and attendant’s char.ges,—lossiof ~i.n”cor1’rie’ei.._c1u.:;;°ing .

laid~up period, loss of unhappiness, discornforts;”loss_VVof_}future*

income and future medical expenses’;V«.il.: not dispute that on
account of the injuries trafficuaccident as
stated supra, the _l_Z)octor__ of permanent
functional disability lforihparticulari .+ihdii1~e% to the whole body
and the same :ais.’:jus’tv.anld€reasonable and it is not in
dispute. treatment for more than
one month ~u_n’de’rgone one surgery. The implant

has been inserted. hrnightihave spent some amount for medical

:_’:’eS'{penses,i’conveyance, nourishing food and attendar1t’s charges on

account or the.iini3’u_ry..sustained, he might have been advised by the

l «,Doctor take rest and medical follow~up treatment for a

period of three months. We assess the income of appellant at the

LR:-.3,OO0/– p.m., having regard to his age and occupation

and taking all these relevant factors into consideration, we

%:……~

Rs.97,200/– {Rs.3,000 X 12 X 15 X 18/ 100} as against Rs. 638,850/–

awarded by the Tribunal.

8. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation

future medical expenses. It is not in,”diis’pute’i..that appellant» 7.

has undergone surgery and it requires one ‘more su_r.ge1:y~.an–di’o.ther

incidental expenses. Taking this into ‘we deem
it fit to award Rs.10,000/ to bepa1’*”tlie– future medicaal expenses,

which will meet the ends ofjiusticei;

9. Having totheifactsi”andi’circumstances as above,
the instant appeal alhloiwedjiirif_part.,r Theiiimpugned judgment and

award modified as under-

1. Towards T Rs. 30,000/–

Medical expenses, conveyance, Rs. T 70,000/~

“=.nourish:rnenvtz of food and attendant’s
_._ .r:ha.r_ges_ _

3.’ during laid–up period Rs. 9,000 / _

T amenities, discomforts, Rs. 20,000/–

. «.5. .,Loss of future income Rs. 97,200/–

unhappiness”

«.6; if future medical expenses Rs. 10,000 /-

_ Total R .

2,363,200/–

U}

/H/e

Draw the award accordingly.

hum /