Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 853 (KAR)

S. Narayana v. M. G. Ravichandran

2014-09-25

P.D.WAINGANKAR

body2014
JUDGMENT P.D. Waingankar, J. 1. This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act is preferred against the judgment and award dated 3-7-2010 passed in M.V.C. No. 970/2008 on the file of the Small Causes Court - 11 and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore. The Tribunal by the impugned judgment and award has recorded a finding that the driver of the car and the appellant/claimant contributed towards the said accident to an extent of 75% and 25% respectively and thereby, awarded a sum of Rs. 1,35,825/- as compensation to the claimant. Aggrieved by the judgment and award, this appeal is preferred by the appellant/claimant on the ground that the finding recorded by the Tribunal that the driver of the car and the claimant contributed towards the said accident is not sustainable in law and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under 'conventional heads' is on the lower side and it requires to be enhanced considerably. 2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent - Insurance Company would submit that the Tribunal upon proper appreciation of the evidence has rightly recorded a finding that the accident occurred on account of the negligence of the driver of the car and the appellant to the extent of 75% and 25% respectively and awarded compensation of Rs. 1,35,825/- and that the award does not call for interference by this Court. 3. Having heard the submissions of both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material on record, the following points arise for consideration:-- "i. Whether the Tribunal was justified in recording a finding that the accident occurred on account of negligence of the driver of the car and appellant/claimant to an extent of 75% and 25% respectively is proper? ii. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?" 4. It is borne out from the record that the accident occurred while the appellant/claimant was crossing the road. It is borne out from the evidence of the claimant, who has been examined as RW. 1 that he was crossing the road even after seeing the car. The accident occurred four feet away from the edge of the road. It is true that the appellant/claimant ought to have seen the vehicle that was coming on the road before crossing the road. 1 that he was crossing the road even after seeing the car. The accident occurred four feet away from the edge of the road. It is true that the appellant/claimant ought to have seen the vehicle that was coming on the road before crossing the road. At the same time, it is difficult to cross the roads in a city like Bangalore since the vehicles are continuously coming one after the another. Sometimes, even if you wait for considerable time, it is impossible to cross the road. Fed up by waiting, the claimant might have attempted to cross the road and in the process, he has also contributed towards the accident to some extent, but not to an extent of 25% as recorded by the Tribunal. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the spot of the accident, I hold that the driver of the car as well as claimant have contributed towards the said accident to an extent of 85% and 15% respectively. While awarding the compensation, the Tribunal has taken the income of the claimant as Rs. 1,500/- per month which is meager amount. Having regard to the age of the claimant as 22 years and that the accident took place in the year 2008, the ends of justice will be met if the income of the claimant is taken as Rs. 4,000/- per month and the disability to the whole body as 15%. In that case, the 'loss of income during the period of treatment' comes to Rs. 12,000/- (4,000 x 3) as against Rs. 4,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. The amount awarded under the head 'loss of future income' on account of disability would come to Rs. 1,29,600/- (600 x 12 x 18) as against Rs. 48,600/- awarded by the Tribunal. The amount awarded by the Tribunal under other heads appear to be just and proper and no interference is called for. Thus, the claimant is awarded a total compensation of Rs. 2,84,600/- under various heads as under:-- HEADS Rs. Pain and sufferings 50,000.00 Loss of happiness and future amenities 50,000.00 Loss of income during the treatment period 12,000.00 Incidental charges 18,000.00 Medical expenses 10,000.00 Future medical expenses 15,000.00 Loss of future income 1,29,600.00 Total 2,84,600.00 5. Thus, the claimant is awarded a total compensation of Rs. 2,84,600/- under various heads as under:-- HEADS Rs. Pain and sufferings 50,000.00 Loss of happiness and future amenities 50,000.00 Loss of income during the treatment period 12,000.00 Incidental charges 18,000.00 Medical expenses 10,000.00 Future medical expenses 15,000.00 Loss of future income 1,29,600.00 Total 2,84,600.00 5. While answering issue on negligence, I have already come to a conclusion that the claimant has also contributed to the said accident to an extent of 15%. If 15% is deducted from Rs. 2,84,600/-, the remaining amount would come to Rs. 2,41,910/-. Thus, the claimant has been awarded compensation of Rs. 2,41,910/- as against Rs. 1,96,100/-awarded by the Tribunal. There shall be an enhancement of Rs. 45,810/- over and above of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, 1 pass the following order:-- "Appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award dated 3-7-2010 passed in M.V.C. No. 970/2008 on the file of the Small Causes Court -11 and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, stands modified. The appellant/claimant has been awarded an enhanced compensation of Rs. 45,810/- over and above of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal together with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till the date of realization. It is made clear that the claimant is not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 193 days. The respondent - Insurance Company shall deposit enhanced compensation together with interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." In the event of deposit the entire amount shall be released to the appellant/claimant.