IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 12"" DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009.
: PRES ENT-.1
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.. }_?'__:'~'{"'i"}I};§.."'v~v..,_D:__Vf _
AND
THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE
M.F.A.NO.16V56aOF 2065 . D '
BETWEEN: A D. 'D
Sri Shankar @' She-kar Shéfi./y,.
Now Aged about36' 'Y6afs,' ' .
S/0 Manju Shetityf = . D 2 V-
R/0 Lakshmi \/§_enka'LeshWéu:a,' "
Tea Stall, gnear Raj1.aéhekar§" "
:V'BE1I'_.'P,(V33D(4I"DI:'".:"j'/-.?,Vl:V,"' _ !::.'
E3.an'ga1or_e' ' ' ~.. ._
" V' A ' A ...Appe11am:'
D 8: Sri.P1'11a Raddy, Advocates]
A
" B'S':'irfi;vasaIu.
-. __ Sy'~o_VBa1akrishna.
.. Rfat N0 68, Jaladarshani,
'B--[E.L. Layout.
A Banga10re-- 94.
2 A Sri. S Bhaskar.
S/0 P Su;Id ,
/' MW
i\.>
No 3599. 8"' Cross.
1 Main, Gayathrinagar,
Bangalore -- 21.
3 The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
No 20. Jalahalii Cross.
Chokkasandra, Banga1ore- 57.
Rep by its Manager.
[By Sri. C Shankara Reddy, " . «. it
RI ~ Served ; and R2 ~ Noticegdispensed w'i:ti3]}V
*'-'5¢** ' :
This MFA is fiied..V_U/SAi'1"'/3.{ 3) of._MV Act against the
judgment and award. .?dai:'ed %.j_giv9/9:/'OAS passed in MVC
No.303l/2004: on the file oifv'18th.._Addl.;_Iudge, Member.
MACT~4, Court V of ,8'rr:'aIl" C'a'1;i_ses,; Metropolitan Area.
Bangalore the claim petition
for Zcoinpensation seeking enhancement of
cornpens_ation}."=-._"c " ' -
cor:iir1g~~'i'on for Hearing, this day. N.K.
PA§"'H. _.J ., delivered" the following:
JUDGl\/KENT
._ appeal by the claimant is directed against the
juldgm'e:nt,v"'land award dated 19"' September 2005,
ll "passed in lVI.V.C.No.3031/2004, on the file of the XVIII
l'Additional Judge, Member. Motor Accident: Claims
2'
,
<'__,,___,,,,_,_,,_M,,_______~_M,,,,,,.........._...,...
..._..Re-Sporidentis 9
(W)
Tr1buna1~4, Bangalore City ( "iiibun-al' for brevity ) for
enhancement. of compensation on the ground that, the
compensation of Rs.38,000/~ awarded in favour of the
Claimant appeliant as against his Claim of
lakhs, is inadequate.
2. The facts in brief are that, the
helper in tea shop. That on 20? t1"2"--'2Q0"3. b
PM, when he was walking on 4the_Banga1o're--Turni:u'r--.V
Road as pedestrian near Vflaya Barikt ma TVSVV
Victor" gyaie ""o€aring"vVE\Io.KA~O4/EB-5796 being
driver1.'by4'it's-with high speed, in a rash
and negligent ma,nr;.eii"«a~nd dashed against the claimant.
Eljesuit of"the..saIne, the Claimant fell down and
' .sus1'rained'_'gri'e--vous injuries.
i" 3.' "_"_v»Qn,d'aec0unt of the injuries sustained in the
appellant. filed the Claim petition before the
'"E'i'i-t_)nuna1, seeking Con;Znsat.ion of Rs.O5.00 lakhs
!
L
against the respondents. The said claim petition had
come up for Consideration before the Tribunal on 19″‘
September 2005. The Tribunal, after considering the
relevant material available on file and after appreCi_a~t_io1i
of oral and documentary evidence,
petition in part, awarding a sum’ of
interest at 8% per annum, from the ~r;latfe._o’f
the date of deposit. aggriev.e_dl’l.:Vb§i._:”t»he*’; said-if
judgment and award paVsseid.__bypAthe”Trib1j1nal, the
appellant felt iieeeslsitatedvExt?) this appeal,
seekingmenh aneefnent’ of eornpensatioii.
4. lea,i’ned’«.,eouI1sel for the appellant at the
O1._Zl:p’t’:;°.3’=€'[:__TSL!bII1lff€d.–..t.hat, the Tribunal committed error in
V .not:VaW.aii’ding any eompensation towards loss of future
ineorne. though the Doctor has assessed the
disabivllity in respect of the whole body at 24%. Further,
hesubmitted that, no compensation is awarded towards
loss of income during treatment period and that the
compensation awarded towards loss of arnenities.
medical expenses a.nd conveyance, nourishing food and
attendant charges is also on the lower side. Therepfore,
he submitted that the impugned
passed by the Tribunal is liable
accordingly.
5. As against this, colunlsel «.
Insurance Company, inter”v.._al’ia, sou.ght..p_tgs the
impugned judgment *”a1j1d aw’ard.:’:puassed l:iy”tl1eV4 Tribunal
stating tlrie =comp.ens’a’tieri awarded is just and
reason_a’r51e and.fjQes.4ne.t,”‘c_ail for interference, since it is
passed after l’1e_aring’..–‘*’nthe parties and after careful
e\;.at*uaftion ofth-e–«”oral and documentary evidence
L *avail_a’i3.l_et on__ii1–e.
” We have heard the learned counsel for
appella.nt and learned unsel for Insurance Company.
d__J_¢____W__H”_r,_,._.
7. After hearing the leai-med counsel for the
parties and after going through the original records
available on file, the only point that arises for our
consideration is as to:
“Whether the compensation awarded _._ if
Tribunal tsjust and reasonable ?
It is not in dispute that on accou”‘maof the it
occurred on 20–l2–2003, the
frontal EDH and AC?’ haae’~..fracture’
comp,oundf”‘frQntalV delpresseri fracture! laceration over
eye lid,’ uabrasion~-.ovei’–.___r’i’ght side of forehead, abrasion
over’ the right forearm near the wrist, lacerated Wound
over puosterioi” aspect of left forearm, moderate head
first instance, he was inpatient in MS.
Ramaiafi -ll’-.:I’*’ospii.a11, shifted to Nil\/[HANS and thereafter to
Victoria’. Hospital. The Doctor has assessed the
‘ .perri§anent disability at l6% in respect of right eye, -4.9/o
“____M____W__M_.,_..»
-~~in respect of left eye aid 4% in respect of decreased
:
;
J
sleep and irritability, arriving at the total permanent
disability” in respect of whole body at 24%. Thisaspect
of the matter has not been considered iiillqfiroper
perspective by the Tribunal. Undoubtedly’;
of the disability, the appe1lar3’t”‘has ato of l
income in future. The Tribun__al–_Vhas ‘erred’.i1:1.7nVot_u
awarding any amount towards. loss’–oi”vvfu’::ure income. V
The total body disability asses’s–.edlV–byA Doctor appears to
be little exaggerated. the facts and
circumstances”«y:.o:f’ the Ca–se,”‘w.e–:_”assess the total body
disabiillity taking the monthly
income. of .»at Rs.3,000/~, adopting the
correct rriultiplie.r and total body disability at
we award ‘a’f”sun1 of Rs.86,400/– {i.e. Rs.3,000/M x
11.00] towards loss of future income.
8. Tribunal has erred in awarding a sum of
Rs.u10,tGQO/- towards loss of amenities, without taking
All/lli'{3«’C0I1SideTatl0fl the percentage of disability suffered
/’
4′
.= _____,,__i.,….«…–.«-»»~—-
K’~\,,_”
by appeilant. The appeiiant has to undergo the trauma
during the rest of his iife. He has been admitted first
to MS. Ramaiah Hospitai, NIMHANS and thereéi,:t’t’c>r t.o
Victoria Hospital, totally for more than a
Doctor has assessed the permanent .24’fc$..
which the appellant has to endtgre
life. Therefore, having regard t.o’7a.1I”these”as,peet_s,
deem it fit to award a sum litowfards loss
of amenities on aeeiourit “”dis’abiiity as against
Rs. 10,000 / – awarded.AbyhTribL1r;a1’iix’; 1 ”
The erred in awarding only a sum
of Rs.8,t”)O(i/’« Vtowardsexmedical expenses, conveyance,
1’10:1_iYiE§-hiilg foo’d;v~–and attendant charges. The same is
ivnac¥eq.1,iat,e~having regard to the nature of injuries
sustained-‘i.a;nd the duration and nature of treatment
undergone by appellant. Therefore. we award a sum of
Rs.43_«3.O0O/– towa1’ds medical expenses and conveyance.
nourishing food and atéfndant charges.
5
9
10. Further. the Tribunal has erred in not
awarding any amount towards loss of income during the
period of treatment. Admittedly, the appel1ant..’w_as_V_inv
patient for a total period of more than a
taken the monthly income th_e””‘ap’pelllant ‘/_$At/T
Rs.3,000/-, we award a sum
of income during the period ofpptreatmlent. it
11. However, so as ti-viilcornlpensation
awarded towards pair,1_.”:an(f:’_ s1§:ffeii.i’i’;_.g,s«.is concerned, it is
just a;1id’evreason:alf)le call for interference.
‘In facts and circumstances of
the caseu,””alp.peal filed by appellant is allowed
in» The» iI’n.p3;gr:ed judgment and award dated 19″”
r :Septtem_berv.tll’2QO5, passed in M.V.C.No.303£/2004, on
l’.V–l'(;__flf’tlie XVIII Addl. Judge, lVle;rnbe’r, Motor
Accident, Claims Trib’unal–4, Bangalore City is hereby
A nrnotiyified, awarding a s In of Rs.1,42,400/~ as against
.—-»—“”””””””””-“‘”‘””‘~
I0
Rs.38.000/~ awarded by the Tribunal. The i:)reak–up is
as under:
i) Towards pain and sufferings Rs.
ii] Towards loss of income
During the period of treatment Rs. __
iv} Towards medical expenses, not1’ris.hing l
V) Towards Disability and
2o,o’oo/5
_
iii) Towards loss of future incorne = /– it ‘v
Food and attendant Charges
loss of Amenities of life!’-..V_ 26,000/~
i”r6£a1s«. ” ‘ 1,424.00/W
1’-The-InVst1ran’ee’Clo1npany is directed to deposit the
enhancled!cornpensatiionluof Rs.l.04,400/– with interest
at” 15% per annum, within a period of four Weeks from
daltepoféireeeipt of copy of the judgment. and award.
‘ vffiutj-._o£’V’the enhanced Compensation. a sum of
with proportionate interest shall be kept: in
f
1, _w_M_W__H_w__,,….–
/
Fixed VVi:)ep0sit in the name of the appellant in any
Alfilationaiized or Scheduled Bank for a period of five
11
years, renewable by another five years with liberty
reserved to him to withdraw the quarterly interest.
The re’maim’r1g sum of Rs.29.4~004/_?»-_fi”‘ayith
proport.ior1ate interest shafi be released,
deposit by the Insurance Compazjgy.
Office to draw award accoi:(:1ir:g1y*§
; 3ooeE
BMV*