High CourtsSingle Bench

Gangadhar vs Shamrao and Others

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 5 March 2015 · Citation: (2015) 03 KAR CK 0075

HON’BLE JUDGES
Budihal R.B., J.
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 166
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 30978 of 2013 (MVC)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 684 words

Budihal R.B., J.—This appeal is preferred by the appellant-petitioner being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and also challenging the legality and correctness of the judgment and order dated 18.02.2013 passed by the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Gulbarga, on the grounds mentioned in the appeal memorandum.

2.

The appellant/petitioner has filed the claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act claiming compensation of Rs. 15,00,000/- for the injuries sustained in the motor vehicle accident.

3.

The brief facts of the case of appellant/petitioner is that on 02.09.2007, after completing his meals he was proceedings to his carpenter shop at Nagoor road of Mahagaon Cross, and on the way at about 4.00 p.m. near Hanuman Temple of Dhammur Cross of Mahagaon, petitioner met with his relative by name Kalayani. Both of them were having conversation by standing by the side of the road, at that time one Hero Honda motor cycle bearing Regn. No. KA-32/K-4382 being driven by its rider, came from Kamalapur side in high speed, in rash and negligent manner and dashed to the petitioner and petitioner fell down and sustained grievous injuries.

4.

Respondent No. 2/Insurance Company has filed its written statement denying the allegations that the said accident is because of rash and negligent driving by the rider of the motor cycle. It is also contended that the appellant/petitioner has not sustained any such injuries and the driver of the motor cycle was not holding valid and effective driving licence and on these grounds sought for dismissal of the petition.

5.

The Tribunal after considering the oral as well as documentary evidence, recorded affirmative findings so far as the accident and the appellant sustaining injuries in the said accident. With regard to quantum of compensation, Tribunal awarded the total compensation of Rs. 1,70,600/- under different heads.

6.

The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as under:

"Towards to pain and suffering, it has awarded Rs. 10,000/-, which is on the lower side and appellant is entitled to another sum of Rs. 10,000/- under the said head.

Towards medical expenses, though the medical bills are produced at Ex. P-9, which is amounting to Rs. 26,274/-, Tribunal has awarded only Rs. 15,000/-, when the bills are produced for an amount of Rs. 26,274/-, appellant is entitled for the difference amount of Rs. 11,274/- (Rs. 26,274 - Rs. 15,000).

Towards attendant, nourishment and conveyance charges, only an amount of Rs. 3,000/- is awarded and I feel it is necessary to enhance the said amount by another sum of Rs. 10,000/-, which is just and reasonable.

Towards loss of earning during treatment period only an amount of Rs. 3,000/- has been awarded by the Tribunal, which is further enhanced by Rs. 5,000/- to make it Rs. 8,000/-.

Regarding loss of future earnings, Tribunal has taken monthly income at Rs. 3,000/- per month, which is on the lower side. As the accident is of the year 2007, the claimant is entitled to Rs. 4,000/- per month. The multiplier applicable on the basis of age of the petitioner, who was 24 years old is 18 and the disability is 20% to the whole body, which comes to Rs. 1,72,800/- (Rs. 4000 X 12 X 18 X 20%). As Tribunal has already considered an amount of Rs. 1,29,600/-, compensation under the said head is enhanced by Rs. 43,200/- (Rs. 1,72,800 - 1,29,600).

Towards loss of amenities an amount of Rs. 10,000/- is awarded, which is reasonable.

Hence, in all, the appellant is entitled to enhanced amount of Rs. 79,474/- (Rs. 10,000 + Rs. 11,274 + Rs. 10,000 + Rs. 5,000 + Rs. 43,200)."

7.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The judgment and order passed by Tribunal is hereby modified by enhancing the compensation by Rs. 79,474/-. Respondent No. 2/Insurance Company is liable to pay the enhanced amount of Rs. 79,474/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. The respondent No. 2/Insurance Company to deposit the said amount with interest at 9% p.a. before the Tribunal within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.