Sri. M.Arun Ponnappa, Advocate for R2;
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 25"?" DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2009
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE A.l\E.VENUGOPAi_A_
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.11139s/,.iovoV5:sA(i~i\/'T 3 A
BETWEEN:
Master Manoj @ Mano} Kumar, ..
S/o. R. Natara}, aged abc'ait"-fiyears;
Since minor is represented"b.y"'n%s ' _ » _
Father and natural guardian R;Nataraj, ' «-
S/o. Late Ramakri,shn.a, * O "
Aged about 36 years," _
R/a. No.23, 14"' Cross," E
Agraharadasarahaiii... _ 2
BangaiOre.~_S5_O ' '
...APPEL§_ANT
(By Sri:'TIPa--rames:E§wa:ra.§pa, A_d'vooate)
AND: V H % A' E
1. K.Ba|anagesh.wa~ra"K'umar,
{Aged ma}'o_r,wNo.27, 15' Main,
v.':_"i~1?_?_Cross, |V'|'U'i'r€S'hWaI' Biock,
Mahaiéakshmpuram,
ufiangaioorefi 560 086.
2, Reg.iosnaTir"Manager,
Nation'ai Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Shsibharam Complex, 2"" fioor,
T. No.22/1, M.G.Road,
"gfiangalore -- 560 001.
A ...RESPONDENTS
E “Notice to R1 is dispensed with v.o.dated 7.10.2009)
M)
This MFA is flied under Section 173(1) of MV Act
against the Judgment and Award dated 01.08.2005 passed
in MVC No.6181/2004 on the file of the X Addi.fSmali
Causes Judge, Member MACT, Metropoiitarifl.._’A.rea,
Bangalore (SCCH~16), seeking enhance~n<:e_nst__"__i'.ioi'._
compensation.
This appeai coming on for adem.i_9i9\o.n.”lténis;»4d’a’i,fi_’_:»the_V 00′
Court delivered the following:–
JuooAENT”;r«
with the consen’c,.Qf learne-‘1″‘cou–nAsel,’heard final
disposai.
2. Appefiant / peuuaher had rged cflawn peuuon
under Vehicles Act, 1988
Rs.i’i2iVi§0,000/- for the injuries
sustained ina” accident that took place on
25.08;04 invehnng ¢ar’beanng regnnrauoriluo.KA-o2–B-
VF:rs’t~_respon’dent is the owner of the said car and
V-the respondent is the insurer. 2″” respondent
corit._est_ed the claim petition. Hence, issues were framed.
l:nVggthe’v..-trial, two witnesses deposed for the petitioner
0′ ‘A.tVh–rough whom Exs.P1 to P11 were marked. No evidence
….was led for the respondents. Appreciating the evidence on
‘s
«/5
record, with reference to the rival contentions, it was held
that the accident has taken place on 25.08.04 on acjcocunt
of actionabie negiigence on the part of the driverof”t:h’eIcar._
bearing registration l\io.KA-02-8-8128 and._th:e_vp:etiti_onere
sustained injuries. Noticing the injgrass’.oosu’sta:ir.ed,i:”the
amount of expenditure for obtainineg.tr’eatme.nt…MACi’;
awarded globai cornpensation’V’Vof._V’Rs,5O,VOO.Q_]=with interest
at 6% pa. from the’ ciate (if paylrnent. This
appeal is for increase of i.e., to pass a
Just award.
-v
th’e*”learned counsel for the
appeliantl/._pet.itioneer'”aVnid.Zithe.2″ respondent and perused
the certified. c’opie’s Aofrlthe record of the Trial Court made
av»a_ji’i’ian_l.e for rny'”pe~r–u«sal, by the learned counsei.
_V z_vi.r..%._:L”eVarned counsel for the appeilant contended
t”rref_”_»Trieiiijullnal has not awarded just compensation
taiting V-..;:nto”consideration the nature of injuries sustained
and the resultant loss. It was submitted that the
lt
V2′
appreciation of evidence is wholly erroneous, which has led
to the Tribunal not passing a just award.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for thVe,~_4iV;;nd
respondent — Insurance Company submitteG_””‘th.af:-.:__t::.e’*_
injured being a child and the chances of_–~:ecojv.er§t:beii1g”
fast and in the absence of examination-lof~the.’s.u’rgeo’nlt,_w’h1Qll
treated the injured, the comDensation_V_award.ed ‘,Vi::{.j_ustT§anld
reasonable and no enhancementis called ‘fora’
6. The point tha.t.fjaris7es for ‘c-o_’n.fs’iéeration is:
” Whether _me.:.T’rib’una_l hasvjla-.wa”rded just
‘”r’i–ot’in dispute. Fact of appellant
sustegaininjg injuriesvlas ‘.3 result of actionable negligence on
Vjlthejxparltnlfoffithe driver of the vehicle is also not in dispute.
treatment at Madhu Hospital is not
under vchallienge. Ex.P6 is the wound certificate which
it .::shows that there was a crush injury of right foot, fracture
it “oVf”3″”§, 4″‘ and 5″” metatarsal of right side and fracture of
‘*-medial mallelous on right side and abratn over both the
(fl
knees. §x.P7 shows that the petitioner was also examined
at ESE Hospital. Ex.P8 is the medicai biils and Exs.P9 and
PM are X–rays. Ex.P10 is the case sheet. No doutifirthe
doctor who treated the injured was not
However, PW-2 has deposed with regard to,__th_’e.,treatii’_neih’ti
obtained by the injured in the hoispitaifj
evidence on record, the award r’n’ad’e by,V.vtiieV”‘?ritiun’ai”g
cannot be heid as just compenvsactiijonj.
8. Since the ap’p.éI’iiant–‘_VhaVd,su.st,ai’ned crush injury of
right foot, the frjactureS…0r:i_ and”55?-siwnetatarsal right
side aVfidMfI’a.C:fitfUi’€”:f)f’ rned’ia| rn’aii’e’l4ous right side, he must
have ts.ndergo_nVeV:Wi.otto-fiiji’pain and sufferings for a
considerabile. length of,_ti’m’ie. In the circumstances, it wouid
award”av—compensation of Rs.2S,0OO/- under the
head_”‘pain.,”‘ia,nd–.sufferings’. Appeliant is a non earning
person. _ injury has deprived him the normai pieasures
of iife.._v”‘i;fhe injury would affect his normaf functioning. In
“idt.h:e”c.ircdmstances, it is just to award a sum of Rs.25,000/–
under the head ‘Eoss of amenities’.
K
E:
9. The Tribunal has held that the total expenditure
for obtaining treatment would be Rs.15,000/–. It has
failed to take into consideration the incidental e>.{_p*enises
i.e., attendant charges, extra diet, conveyance””ch1a.rge$_”_
etc. The appellant could not havemt>ai..beeh t’rea;Le.d_a.s and»
outpatient in the hospital. Innmth-e:_c–i..rcuni’st–ahceslf%it would
be just to award a oft,Rs_,’2C;OQQ’/”~-__under the head
‘incidental charges’ i.em,”-.conveya_n’ce;vgiattendant charges
and extra towards obtaining
of treattmentllin’.Va.|_l_;’»a ‘sdf:1.___of .Rs.3’5,000/~ under the head
medical and incidental ,.e$<~p_enses.
Injthe resu'lt,..__the appeal is allowed in part.
V of the judgment and award passed
b§y,__the Trifibiutnal, it is held that the appeliant/ petitioner is
entitled to total compensation of Rs.8S,00O/– (as against
"«l:"_ARs,'§C?,O0O/~ awarded by MACT) which shall carry interest
/5'
at 6% pa. from the date of filing of claim petition till the
date of deposit.
The 2″‘ respondent — insurer shall deposit the
balance amount in the MACT within a period of two’
from today.
Registry is directed to draw n1’odif.i_eci’ati§}a–r§’.;d”V’V
IUD
sac*