Sri. Suresh, S/O. Somappa Devalapur, Age: 32 Years, Occ: Agriculture, R/O

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 7th DAY OF JUNE, 2013 :BEFORE : THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. PATIL M.F.A.No. 24277 of 2011 (MV) Between: Sri. Suresh, S/o. Somappa Devalapur, Age: 32 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/o. Asundi, Tq: Saundatti, Now at Bailhongal-591 102, Dist. Belgaum. ... Appellant (By Sri. Madanmohan M. Khannur, Advocate) And: 1. Smt. Shakuntala, S/o. Basavaraj Babji, Age: Major (Correct age not known) R/o. Dhumwad, Tq: Kalghatagi, Dist. Dharwad-580 001. 2. The Manager, The United India Insurance Company Limited, Srinivas Talkies Complex, 1st Floor, Market, P.B.No.54, Dharwad, Through its Belgaum Divisional Office, 2 Maruti Galli, Belgaum-590 016. Respondents (By Sri. S.S.Koliwad, for Sri.B.C. Seetharam Rao Associates, for R2, Notice to R1 is dispensed with v/o dated 7.6.2013) This M.F.A. is filed U/S. 173(1) of MV Act, against the judgment and award dated 1.3.2011 passed in MVC No.2632/2009 by the Senior Civil Judge, Assistant Sessions Judge & Addl. MACT, Bailhongal, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation. This MFA. coming on for orders this day, the Court delivered the following: : J U D G M E N T : Though this matter is posted today for orders, with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal. 2. This appeal by the appellant-claimant is arising out of the impugned judgment and award dated 1.3.2011 passed in MVC No.2632/2009 by the Senior Civil Judge, Assistant Sessions Judge & Addl. MACT, Bailhongal (‘Tribunal’ for short) for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that, a sum of `6 ,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. on account of the injuries 3 sustained by him in the road traffic accident is inadequate. 3. In brief, the facts of the case are: The appellant claims to be aged about 30 years and he was hale and healthy prior to the accident. He met with an accident on 25.5.2009 at about 14.30 hours when he was riding a motor cycle bearing No.KA.24.J.2767 on Dharwad Kalghatagi road at old Nuggikeri cross, Dharwad Taluk, on account of the rash and negligent driving by the driver of truck bearing No.MEI 5841 and sustained fracture of left 5 th metatarsal neck, lacerated wound over right dorsum. Immediately, he was shifted to District Hospital, Dharwad, where he took treatment as inpatient from 28.5.2009 to 30.5.2009 and thereafter, on the advice of the Doctor, he has taken bed rest and follow up treatment. Further, it is the case of the appellant that he spent reasonable amount towards medical expenses and other incidental charges. Taking all these 4 aspects into consideration, he has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation against the respondents. 4. The said matter had come for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, in turn, after evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence and the relevant materials on file, has allowed the said petition in part and awarded a sum of `6,000 /- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a.,. Being dis- satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, appellant has presented this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation. 5. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and perused the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and after careful perusal of the materials available on record, including the impugned judgment 5 and award passed by the Tribunal, it emerges that, the occurrence of the accident and the resultant injuries sustained by the appellant are not in dispute. Further, it is also not in dispute that on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant, he has taken treatment as inpatient from 28.5.2009 to 30.5.2009. During the said period, he might have suffered pain and agony, might have spent considerable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. The Tribunal ought to have taken all these factors into consideration while awarding compensation and what is awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side and it needs to be enhanced. Taking into consideration the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, the nature and duration of the treatment taken by him, I award a sum of `4 ,000/- towards injury, pain and sufferings instead of `2,000/-, `3,000/- to wards conveyance, loss of income during treatment period instead of `2,000/- and a sum of `7,000/- towards loss of amenities and 6 unhappiness instead of `2,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In all, the appellant is entitled to the total compensation of `14 ,000/- instead of `6,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be an enhancement of `8,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization. 7. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part and the impugned judgment and award dated 1.3.2011 passed in MVC No.2632/2009 by the Senior Civil Judge, Assistant Sessions Judge & Addl. MACT, Bailhongal, is hereby modified, awarding the additional compensation of `8 ,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realizatio n. The Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of `8,000/- with interest, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. 7 The enhanced compensation of `8 ,000/-with interest shall be released in favour of the appellant immediately, on deposit by the Insurer. Draw the award accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE tsn*.

Load more