MFA 1340/2006
EN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAT OF' MARCH, "Gt
BEFORE A
THE HON'BLE MR.Jus'rIsE__B.s._'I5A'I§I'I;.'1I _
M.Ir,A.go.13Qzz§06:
BETWEEN:
SI-IAI-IENSI-IA,
s/0 MASTANSAB,
AGE: 35 YEARS,
occ: AGRICULTURE,
R_/OBAHERNAHALLI, , WV
'I'Q.8sDIS'I'.B1DAR_.'fi__ I ..APPELLAN'I'
(BY SR1L0KE.SH"»vMfi{I;AVALLI,AADVJ; 1; V A
AND:
1.
MD.1v1AI3D1JAI;’;II+II3,~s:s}II2.-U-H
S10 IcfAT.EHvMo_.AMIIIA*I:1_SAB,’
AGE: MAJOR,’
L-QRRY _ 2 – _
R/0, H.NO’.’6-5- 109 SANGAREDDY,
BEST: IMEDAK; A.P.
~ . IIIDIA ASSURANCE 00. L. D.,
– SANGAREDD2′. DIST: MEDAK, A.P.
‘«.B¥’I*rs«vIaRM:-c.II MANAGER,
* . PLAT No’: . IDEPT. CODE 31,
THROUGH? L’»i’u’iSIONAL MANAGER
GULBARGA DIVISION, GULBARGA. ..RESPONDEN’l’S
H ” ‘ $431 A’;II.13HAT. ADV. FOR R-2)
‘T’Hi’3 APFEAL IS FILED ‘ 1’3 173i1j OF THE IVIOTCR VEHICLES ACT
I U
“AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 3.3.05 PASSED IN MVC
MFA 1340 I 2006
2
l’u’0.11’3f0l0N THE FILE OF ADDL-. CIVIL JUDGE (SRiD!\L}__&= ADDL;
MAcT–III, BIDAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PE’IfI*I5IOI~I FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION, ” ~ ,
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS..’:f5AYs”1i7:I4liE
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
1. This appeal is by t..,e’*~ injured’ ‘s.,e-.i.’.’g
enhancement of cOmpenaaiioz1}_.–«.– _ ”
2. On 8.10.1998, when travelling in a lorry
rash and itsiivdziver. The ciaimant Suffered
fractu1e’of1ight*fem_ir,i’ ‘H__e”was admitted to Community Hospital
at Hyderabad. _”La,ter onfiie was referred to another hospital at
3 V’ Wherehe tificieiwent treatment as an inpatient.
t fiied c1a1m’ petition under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehieies Act seeking compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- for
it H the injuries and the permanent disability suffered. He
it ‘exa.’rIined himself as HIV-1 and an Orthopedic Surgeon by name
= ….DrVeershetty was examined as PW-2. Exs.P-1 to P-15 were
My
C/’
MFA 1340/ 2006
3
produced and marked. The respo”d”*t-Insurance Company
though contested the claim did not lead any evidence{
.L1-_ ti-\__:1__.. ..1 1….-..’…:..- ‘rusnin-i.’ ”
documentary, me
occurred due to the actionabie _negiigence on tfue’ “part’–f’i’« urfi
driver of the lorry, comfiensat.jon”1.:pajrab1e as
under:- _ t .
(1) Towards pain and .. Rs. 15,000 / –
(ii) V’ .. Rs. 5,000/-
.. Rs. 4,060/-
fi 7’1 1_.ss–.,éVf-tTutn’re”earnings .. Rs.43.200_]-
In all, a of been awarded as compensation
” xby the inadequate compensation awarded, the
present preferred seeking enhancement.
T i-liave heard the iearned Counsel for the parties and
perused the materials on record.
M-A/
MFA 1340 I 52006
4
7. The evidence on record a’isc’oses t1″t the _’-.:_himant
suffered fracture of right femur. He was operated” for
treating the fractural injury. PW-2 Dr.
examined the claimant for the purpose.._of to
certificate has stated in his evidence upon’
the previous records of the and on of the
§”ti-ent, he .ound tha- c1a’1mant.was una’ele_to without
Le, !.i._._; Though the
limb is cong.e15nedA§j:dhe hasnat menjtionedthe method adopted for
Tribunal in the facts and
circu1iz,stanceVsd’7cuf«th’e {having Iegand to the evidence on
record xivhich was working as coolie, has
the permanent ‘disability compared to the whole body at
.,.T”..’s”.<.=._.__l.__ recorded a finding that the daily earnings of
J
Rs.50,'-. Adoptino L… m_1__1_iplier of 16 hav1n' g
I
due 1eg"ardf~to the age of the injured found to be 3.. §,*ea.-.. 9.- th .
_ time 'of accident, the compensation for loss of future ear-nin"s is
it fawarcled. As can be seen from the quantification of
_ fcompensation awarded, the Tribunal has not awarded a. fair and
fl44u| /
UV
MFA 1340 I 2006
5 V
reasonable -compensation under di1'i'erent heads. in .-fact the
daily earnings taken at Rs.50/- is on the lower ~._the
evidence of the claimant and the factual 4_
in mind. The accident has taken.» place oh" The' e.
injured was a young man of 30 if
a reasonable and fair assessteeiit..V.of the
eoohe is ____eu '-_to __o_eou1it, *~ less than
has to be taken s1.I§s.8fif'+"peii of computing
the the Tribunal at 15%
is Vwho has assessed the
was tteeited the claimant and has not
mentioned, for assessing the disability at
50% pm the
pain and sufl'e1:-ing undergone, it is clear that
serious which insisted the claimant to undergo
s1~\rguery."V, ziniii that view of the matter. a sum of Rs.20,000[.
K V' V' Ldesezyesiito be awarded under the head pain and suffering.
MFA 1340/ 2006
6
9. No amount is awanieci towartls C(‘)’V’Y” l.UUu,
attendant chaiges and other incidental charges. orgy of
Rs.4,060/- is awarded based on the medical
expenses. In my view’ , the claim’ attt is of .
Rs.10.000/– towards medical expexisensi
charges including conveyancegiifoodx, attendant
10. No amount is awsxtied loss of
income during the lsidup to the fractural
injuries sufiex¢;1″«fl§e ‘.1*-tay.e:ft;a1{en rest for a period
of three VI{g.7,’200/ – is awarded as loss
11. As income resulting from the
pexiizgatietit ciisethility isuiiiemd, taking the monthly income of
thewcélisability suffered at 15%, applying the
f .1 .112: enrn1n0. 11. wo_k_ec_1_ o1_1_t, the
i’2.*- of Rs.5,000/~ is awarded towards loss of amenities.
V” ‘”;.:..1..+ 1 mi…-
E’ ievtlden -e of the doctor shows that there is shortening of
1J.5.I..l.I. zeg w:..u.Cb1 the c1aim..=ar.t has to suneri In this of the
. ~ .
MFA 1340/ 2006
7
matter, under head for claimant is e”tit.ea’ for .’s._1_0,0Q0,l-
instead of Rs.5,000/-.
13. It is also seen f…r.n L… evL_ence of the do’e..t.o1′:.A_1that
conducting su1″‘ery, “*’p.ants are gineerte-:1′ “.._nd Via:-e 7.
required to be removed by subjecfing. the to nnaiergo
another surgely. In that vievui”=ofo»the ma_t_ter,..’.= future
medical expenses at o£_Rs._8;6(Kt’: .awa1t1ed;
14. in the result end —gnpeal is ed 1.-
part. The ._ appeilant-claimant is
entitled’ Vf:§sV.V’1,24,320 I -. The ciaimant
is entiiJ,ed _en1’1.aVnced amount at the rate of 6%
per t “of petition till its deposit. The
clai:-.;ant.is else for costs of this proceedings in a sum of
Sdi-‘3
Tudqe