IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
DATED THIS THE 4m mu' OF JANUARY. $@1_Q'g
PRESENT
THE I-ION'BLE MR.JUSTI__C.E,__N. §.{;"1#;*r1I;"H M'
AND
THE HONBLE MILJUSTICE B.siz_E ENIV;é.;¢sfgjV'G'owft5A _
M.F.A.N0. 1 1 19*?» 2006 H{1\/mH
M.F.A.No";- 125891;-E
In M.F.A.No. 11.1€:a7}%{:2;(:r_t)6;':.
BETWEEN:__.
United, India. I;'t1Si;.tan»c'e__C'0. ,' Ltd.,
Shankazj (Surayaj Narayéma Buiiding,
M. G. Rea-:1,Bangaim-eH.+.H~560 001.
By ifs Mané1ger'.~ '
~ " Appellant
.% Adv.)
1. ; G,M.'r1,vChan drashe1;ar,
" ~ » Aged 2.f5"years,
A S'/0, Chandru,
A _ ' R--/a.;' Galihalii, Kaiasapura Post,
% V V. And District.
Lakke Hobli, Chickkamagaiur Taluk
AA Smt. G. K. Sreevidya for Sri. T. N. Vishwanath,
2. Shanmuga Vadivam,
Major,
Parvathi Transport,
No.8, AKE Road,
Trichengonciu Taluk,
Nammakkala District. , __ ._ .,
Re4s'p'a'ndeni'ts
[By Smt. G. K. Sreevidya f0r fl A S ' v _ ,
Sri. T. N. Vishwana'th__, AdV.e._ 'r R. 1.;'"
R-2 notice dispensec1..._With V/0'..dé1t§3d_.
This MFA is filed _U/s. ..1a*3(1} "of MV Act against the
Judgment and award ---d's--ted'; 1.'-3,--C6_=»2006 passed in MVC
N0.7301/2004 on the fi1e; ()f 'A'dd1.--.Judge, Member
MACT--3, Court, of Sm--a1_i=. Cau_ses",. 'M.etrop0iitan mea,
Bangalore (SC:CH.--3],I awardingkka compensation of
Rs.2,22,500/i._ interest @ 6% pa. from the date of
petition _
In M.I?;AM.'N"c... tj125é;fi.I2soe5
BETwEf:1g At
, sn. '£1. chvandrgiéhekar,
~ 0- Chahdru..___. .
t _ V" Aged years,
--,Rv,/_a;.Ga'iiha11i, Kalasapura Post,
-- . Chickkamagaloor Taluk,
' . Chikkjsrrxangalore District.
. Appellant
Adv. for R. 1}
&~
AND'
1. M/ s. The United India insurance C0,. Ltd.,
by its Regional Manager,
Regional Office, No.25.
Shankaranarayan Building,
M. G. Road,
Bangalore -- 560 001.
2. Sri. Shanmuga Vadivarn,
W/o. K. Srinivasan, 1
Major, Parvathi Transport,
No.8, AKE Road,
Trichengondu Taluk,
Namrnakkala District. ' jg
. Respondents
(By Sri. o. Mahes1i,V%i¢idi}.igrfn%'
R.i:3--e,e-ii.ee°ziis§eiieeei.,fwii:§i V'/o dated 01.05.2007}
Tiiie'iiiviF2x is "iiiec1-ti'/e. 1_t7':3(l1) of MV Act against the
Judgment and '-a.ward>'d.ated:' -13--06-2006 passed in MVC
No.730 1'i/2004 on'thel'fil__e"..ot.'--~the VII Addl. Judge, Member
MACT-J3, *C4ourt""ofi"r,'Sm'all Causes. Metropolitan Area,
Bangalore (SCCH--.E5-), partly allowing the Claim Petition for
compensation and' seeking enhancement of compensation.
_v'i'h:ese*.,,A:appea1s coming on for hearing, this day,
N."i1jL VP.1jti1 JQ doirivered the following:
JUDGMENT
pp p These two appeals arise out of the same judgment
Gaward dated 13-06-2006 passed in MVC
ll .NoE.7301/2004 on the file of the V11 Addl. Judge, Member
AW.
E.-
MACT–3, Court of Small Causes, Metropo1itan_.__’Area,
Bangalore [SCCH~3), [hereinafter referred to as
for brevity).
2. The Tribunal by its judgmentand ‘_a”v’vardj.V’Vawardtedl”:3 ‘
sum of Rs.2,22,500/– with interest e%t”p.a.a.
date of petition tin the date””o:f””£ieposit._V_ agsagt the
claim of the Claimant
3. MFA No.1]._197/{:).8…:isV. ‘the”V”insurance Co.
contending is excessive
and the” reduced and MFA
No.1258_Q claimant contending that the
compensation avV’a.rded»- Tribunal is inadequate and
it reqtjiires enhancement.
V “:fa¢ets of the case are:
it was aged about 24 years, working as
drivei’.____Ad3~That on 23-9-02 at about 11.30 13.111. when he
‘vV§fas,_d.i’iVing his Ambassador Car bearing No.MEQ 1992 on
Dliarmapuriwsalem road, near Sanishamthaj, at that time,
a lorry bearing registration No. TAL.6406 came from
opposite direction with high speed in a rash and negligent
manner, and dashed against the car of the c1aimantJ’As a
result, the claimant sustained fracture of fe_rn’urf_’
right hip and other injuries. The doctor haseeseesee the»
disability at 35% to the right leg.:i.__Th_eesarrzeghdwas ‘acc.ep:Ec
and compensation Wag’ deteriniriedtovvardslvlossg of future
income, taking into of occupation
that the he cannot drive
the vehicle account of the injuries
sustaiijijedlll/ir”‘1e. thelvlclaimant was admitted as
inpatientv the more than 48 days and he
also un.derwent two surgeries. On account of the injuries
lxstlstained. the claiinant filed a claim petition. The sanie
consideration before the Tribunal on 13-
‘ _ 6–(l64«… The Tribunal after careful evaluation of the oral and
it Vgdociumentary evidence and other relevant material on
allowed the claim petition in part, fixing
it ” ‘contributory negligence on the part of the Claimant at 25%
/aw»
L
and awarded Rs.2,22,500/– with interest at 6% p.a.’ from
the date of petition till the date of deposit.
5. Being aggrieved by the impugned
award, the Insurance Company haS’pres–ented’Vthe’ a.pp<%a1 '
on the ground that the cornpensation awarded.
Tribunal is excessive and 'i.tp'""'require_s' be Vreducedf
whereas, the claimant has filed' appeal 'oontending that
the Tribunal has committed .awarding just and
reasonable towards loss of future income
and 1oss..of ineo'1ne___durii1g"laidapperiod and not awarding
any cornpensatioti..toward's=.1oss of amenities.
6. We tlae learned Counsel appearing for
~”=,_the;’3Ensi1i’ance”Company and the learned Counsel
papvpearing’ claimant for considerable length of time.
perusal of the judgment and award and
‘yafter critical evaluation of the material on record, it
“idemjerges that, the Tribunal has rightiy fixed contributory
,..,11¢A:Urieg1igence on the part we driver of the offending lorry
WMMAJ
I
Z
at 75% and 25% on the part of the claimant, by assigning
valid reasons in para 9 of the judgment. T hereforea,.’Fyge* do
not find any error or illegality as such,
Tribunal. Interference by this Court”is– .not’_:ca_llued»
8. However, the Tribunal has efredira not avvardiiig
and reasonable eompera.satio.n”w..towards ~…1goss”~,o’f'” future’
income. It is the _the he was aged
about 24 years a:d1*iy–e:r The Tribunal
has taken at Rs.3,000/– per
we accept the same.
The dotttor disability at 35% to the right
leg and ll?/ogto body. The Tribunal has taken
g_ thedisability at “35?/Q”.fOr the reason that the claimant is a
driVergbyVpro.sfes.sion and he has to pull on his life with this
disability, a driver by profession. Therefore, We
lupaeceptu tliesame. In View of the judgment of the Apex
A in Sarala Verma’s Case, reported in 2009 ACJ
1298, the proper multiplier having regard to the age of
/_,,.,…m»’
claimant is “18′ and not ’17’ as taken by the Tribunal.
Therefore, we redetermine the compens?iti0_.n._.”‘,at
Rs.2,26,800/~ (Rs.3,000/– x 12 x 18 x 35,’fi0o):’fttgdwgfuseii
loss of future income.
9. The Tribunal is justified
towards pain and sufferings, mevdicazl “”..;’expenses;’
conveyance, nourishing foodw-‘and. attendantv–.charges and
future medical expenses.-if’ isado not call for
inte1’ference..–w 2
10. Further, ergredd in not awarding any
compe:{1vsaticon’d’d’vi:owards4._:a1o.ss– {of income during laid up
period. it it is that the claimant has
undergone two surgeries and he was inpatient for more
Having regard to the nature of injuries
fact that the claimant underwent two
~V surgdgnerieéaa he might have taken rest at Ieast for about four
it Therefore, taking his income at Rs.3,000/~ per
4 WWWMW
month, for a period of four months, we award Rs. 12,000/-
towards loss of income during laid up period.
11. Further the Tribunal has erred in not awardin’g.any
compensation towards loss of amenities of 1ife.;””it..’i’s.. in
dispute that on account of the injuries~v-sustained,
claimant underwent treatment as
and also underwent two surgeries. ‘me disabi1iet3f.eassressedit >
by the doctor _35%'” :’=’i’he disability is
permanent__ The has to suffer the
discomfort his future life.
Th6f€fC;f€.’– award Rs.25,000/– towards
loss of aineriities of life;
12. the 1i’g’h._tJof the facts and circumstances of the
appeal filed by the Insurance Company is
the appeal filed by the claimant is allowed
‘V in The judgment and award dated 13~O6»~2006
‘2..fpasis*ed iii MVC No.7.’301/2004 on the file of the V11 Add}.
Member MAC’I’–3 Court of Small Causes,
mf
ii
the date of petition tiil the date of
i1*ea1Ii_sati~o§t’L_V ‘ V .
«, 4..:ejgI%£1ianced compensation :z7Rs./-10,600/»~ together with
Metropolitan Area, Bangaiore (SCCH–3], is hereby
modified. The breakup is as under : it it
a} Pain and sufferings Rs.
b) Medicai expenses 'Au C] Loss ofincorne during 2 treatment period 'Rs.
(1) Loss of amenities of 25:,;00O/~
e] Future it ‘Rs. 13,000/-
I) Loss of future it 235,800/_
a total compensation of
Rs.2,68,A1{)O,/_~, asagaidusit”«Rs.2,22,500/~ awarded by the
Tribv_.~11a1_. ‘i’hev”eI1.’i1a1.i’eeii1ent comes to Rs.~*-10,600/– with
“Th’e.; ddlnsurance Co. is directed to deposit the
if/W
interest, Within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of copy of the judgment.
The enhanced compensation with pr0pé’rtion’ate
interest shall be reieased in favour of
immediately on deposit of the same”‘by«the,InstirVé;i1ce–‘Cof’-V’
Office is directed dra*a%”‘tne’jati/ifa rd, accordingly.
i m/2..
V”‘°–d”c ‘ Tudfie
Sdis-ii 7
Tudgwé