Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MAY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.100422/2015 (MV) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.21096 OF 2013 IN MFA NO.100422/2015 : BETWEEN: SRI. ARUN KUMAR S/O. CHINNAPPA KORACHAR, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS AND AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHIKKONATI, TQ: HIREKERUR, HAVERI DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. H. R. HOOLI, FOR SRI. CHANDRASHEKHAR R. HIREMATH, ADVOCATES)
Digitally signed by SHIVAKUMAR HIREMATH Location: HIGH AND: COURT OF KARNATAKA THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC, GULBARGA. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. PRAKASH N. HOSAMANE, ADVOCATE) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.09.2012 PASSED IN MVC CASE NO.85/2011 PASSED BY THE SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HIREKERUR, IN TH INTEREST OF JUSTICE. -2-
IN MFA NO.21096/2013 BETWEEN: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC, GULBARGA PRESENTLY REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER, CENTRAL OFFICE, SARAGE SADAN, GULBARGA. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRAKASH N. HOSAMANE, ADVOCATE) AND: ARUNKUMAR S/O. CHINNAPPA KORACHAR, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS & AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHOKKONATI, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. H. R. HOOLI, FOR SRI. CHANDRASHEKHAR R. HIREMATH, ADVOCATES) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE/QUASH THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.09.2012 PASSED BY THE SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT HIREKERUR IN MVC NO.85/2011 IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -3-
COMMON JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and
respondent on admission in both the appeals. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. As these two appeals are arising out of a common judgment and award of the Tribunal, they are heard together and dispose of by this Court by common
judgment.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties in the present appeals are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition.
4. MFA.No.100422/2015 is filed by the claimant
seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, whereas MFA.No.21096/2013 is filed by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation, Gulbarga (“the Corporation” for short) as the owner and insurer of -4- the offending vehicle, seeking reduction of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
5. As there is no dispute with regard to the injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident occurred on 17.12.2001 due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending bus bearing registration No.KA.32-F-549, and the liability of the Corporation.
6. The point that arises for consideration in this appeal is : Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement or for reduction?
7. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that
in-spite of disability stated by the doctor at 75% to the lower limb, the Tribunal has committed an error in not considering the same and it has considered only 45% disability and the Tribunal has not awarded fair compensation towards loss of earning due to disability. -5- Further the Tribunal has not considered the income of the claimant, in-fact the claimant was a coolie or unskilled labour and he was earning Rs.200/- per day and the claimant own agricultural land and having income of Rs.10,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has not considered this aspect. Hence, he prays to allow the appeal filed by the claimant and to dismiss the appeal filed by the Corporation.
8. As per Ex.P.7-Wound Certificate, the claimant has sustained the following injuries.
1. Comminuted fracture of left-side tibia as per the opinion given by Dr.Harish Kanakapur of Kshjema Hospital, Hubli.
2. Contusion over the right eye brow 3x3 cm.
3. Cut lacerated wounds 2 in number measuring 4x3 cm, 4x3 cm. As per the opinion of the doctor, injury No.1 is grievous in nature and injury Nos.2 and 3 are simple in nature. -6-
9. The injuries sustained and the treatment taken
by the claimant are also evident from Ex.P.8-Discharge Card, Ex.P.12-Medical certificate, Ex.P.15-Case Sheet, Ex.P.16-Discharge Summary and Ex.P.18-Ex-ray report. Hence, the oral evidence of the claimant is supported by the documentary evidence as referred above and the doctor who was examined as PW.2.
10. PW.2-Dr.Harish Kanakapur in his evidence has
stated that the claimant has suffered 45% to the whole body. Considering grievous injury No.1 and other injuries sustained by the claimant, the Tribunal has awarded only Rs.15,000/- under the head of pain and sufferings is not reasonable one. As per settled law for one grievous injury, the claimant is entitled for compensation an amount of Rs.40,000/- and for two simple injuries he is entitled for
Rs.10,000/-. Therefore the claimant is entitled for Rs.50,000/- in all under the head of pain and suffering as against Rs.15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. -7-
11. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.47,500/- towards medical expenses on the basis of the actual medical bills and the same is just and reasonable and no interference is called for by this Court in this regard.
12. Towards loss of earning during the treatment
and loss of earning during bed-rest, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/-. Towards loss of income during laid up period, the Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs.13,500/- considering monthly income of Rs.4,500/- and the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and hence a sum of Rs.13,500/- is awarded under this head as against Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
13. Towards loss of future earnings due to disability, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,88,800/- considering the notional income of Rs.4,500/-, which is just and reasonable and hence no interference is called for in this regard. -8-
14. Considering the disability stated by the doctor,
the compensation in-respect of discomfort and unhappiness undergone by the claimant, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities in life happiness frustration, which is not reasonable and hence an additional sum of Rs.5,000/- is awarded under the head of loss of amenities.
15. Towards food, conveyance, nourishment and
attendant charges, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/-, which is not reasonable and hence an additional sum of Rs.10,000/- is awarded under this head.
16. Towards loss of expectation of life the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/-, which is just and reasonable and hence no interference is called for in this regard.
17. Thus, the claimant is entitled for compensation on the following heads; -9- Compensation awarded Sl. Description By the By this No. Tribunal Court
1 Loss of amenities 20,000 25,000
2 Conveyance, attendant charges
food and nourishment. 10,000 20,000
3 Pain, shock suffering and fractures
and loss of expectation of life 30,000 50,000
4 Loss of future earnings due to
disability 3,88,800 3,88,800
5 Loss of earnings during treatment. 5,000 13,500
6 Loss of expectation of life 15,000 15,000
7 Medical expenses 47,500
Total 5,01,300 5,59,500
Enhanced by this Court 58,500Therefore, the claimant is entitled to receive total compensation of Rs.5,59,500/- as against the compensation of Rs.5,01,300/- awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, I pass the following;
ORDER
i) M.F.A.No.100422/2015 filed by the complainant is hereby allowed in part. ii) M.F.A.No.21096/2013 filed by the Corporation is hereby dismissed. iii) The judgment and award dated 27.09.2012 passed in MVC.No.85/2011 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hirekerur is hereby modified to the extent stated herein above. - 10 -
iv) The claimant is entitled for compensation of Rs.5,59,500/- as against the compensation of Rs.5,01,300/- awarded by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hirekerur with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation of Rs.58,500/- from the date of the claim petition, till the date of its realization. v) Respondent/Corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. vi) Out of the additional compensation, the Tribunal is directed to disburse the entire compensation to the claimant on proper identification. vii) The amount in deposit if any shall be transmitted to the Tribunal within two weeks from today. No order as to costs
Sd/- JUDGE EM: Ct-an List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18