Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1502 (KAR)

Raghu Kumar v. Gangamma

2020-07-27

JYOTI MULIMANI

body2020
JUDGMENT Jyoti Mulimani, J. - Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel on both sides, it is heard finally. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to in terms of their status and ranking before the Tribunal. 3. This is claimant's appeal for seeking enhancement of compensation and modification of the judgment and award dated 08.03.2012 passed in MVC No.1685/2009 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal', for the sake of brevity) 4. The claimant filed the claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident that occurred on 25.12.2008. 5. It is the case of the claimant on 25.12.2008, he was proceedings on the motor cycle bearing reg No. KA-05-HE-8350 as a pillion rider. On the fateful day, i.e., on 25.12.2008, at about 8.00 p.m., at the junction of 2nd cross, 3rd Main, Chamarajpet , Bangalore, the driver of the offending vehicle i.e., auto rickshaw bearing No.KA-02-A- 5760, owned by first respondent and insured by the second respondent, came in a rash and negligent manner and hit against the motor cycle. Due to the said impact, the claimant fell down and as a result of which, he sustained grievous injuries. He was shifted to Shekar Hospital Bangalore, wherein on examination it was found that the claimant sustained comminutted fracture lateral condyle tibia left. The claimant was inpatient at C.S.I Holdsworth Memorial Hospital from 26.12.2008 to 02.01.2009, surgery was conducted and implants were fixed. It is urged that due to the injuries, claimant is not able to do hard work and he is not in a position to stand long time and cannot lift heavy weight. Hence, action was brought by the claimant for compensation together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum by filing a claim petition before the Tribunal. 6. In response to the notices issued by the Tribunal, second respondent appeared through its counsel and filed written statement as well as additional written statement. Insurance Company contented that the accident occurred due to the negligent act on the part of the rider of the motor cycle. The offending vehicle i.e., autorickshaw had no fitness certificate. But the Insurance Company admitted the issuance of policy of insurance in respect of offending vehicle. Insurance Company contented that the accident occurred due to the negligent act on the part of the rider of the motor cycle. The offending vehicle i.e., autorickshaw had no fitness certificate. But the Insurance Company admitted the issuance of policy of insurance in respect of offending vehicle. Further, the Insurance Company denied all other averments in the claim petition. Accordingly, prayed for dismissal of the petition. The first respondent being the owner of the offending vehicle was placed ex parte before the Tribunal. 7. On the basis of the rival pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for its consideration: "i. Whether petitioner proves that on 25.12.2008 at 8.00 p.m., near junction of 2nd Cross, 3rd Main, Chamarajpet, Bangalore, petitioner being a pillion rider of the vehicle bearing Regn.No.KA-05- HE-8350 had met with an accident due to rash or negligent driving of the vehicle, bearing Regn.No.KA-02-A-5760 by its driver and sustained injuries as averred? ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled to for compensation and if so, what amount and from whom? iii. What order?" 8. In order to substantiate his case, claimant examined himself as PW.1 and produced 13 documents which were marked as Exs.P1 to P13. Respondent No.1 did not adduce any evidence. On the basis of the pleadings, the matter proceeded before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after considering the material on record, has awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs only) along with simple interest at 6% p.a. from 7.3.2009 till realization within one month from the date of the order. Aggrieved by the judgment and award, the claimant has preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation and modification of the judgment. 9. Smt.Bhanu H.M. learned counsel appearing for appellant contended that the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is arbitrary and contrary to the law and facts of the case. Learned counsel vehemently urged that the claimant has sustained comminutted fracture lateral condyle tibia left. In view of the grievous injuries suffered by the claimant, he had to take prolonged treatment and was under rest for six months. She also submitted that due to the injuries sustained the claimant is disabled and is unable to do hard work and lift heavy weight and he is not in a position to walk long distance. Learned counsel further contended that the claimant has spent considerable amount towards medical treatment and medicines. She also submitted that due to the injuries sustained the claimant is disabled and is unable to do hard work and lift heavy weight and he is not in a position to walk long distance. Learned counsel further contended that the claimant has spent considerable amount towards medical treatment and medicines. But the Tribunal has failed to take into consideration of the same. Lastly, she contended that the as on the date of the accident, the claimant was aged 27 years and he was working as a Accountant at COGO, International Company Private Limited, Yelahanka, Industrial Area, Bangalore, and was earning a sum of Rs.14,000/- per month. But the Tribunal without considering the above factual issues has proceeded in awarding compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- with simple interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Therefore, she submitted that the award of the Tribunal calls for interference and accordingly, prayed for allowing of the appeal. 10. Per contra, Sri.Jwala Kumar, learned counsel appearing for second respondent - Insurance Company vehemently contented that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is exorbitant and claimant is not entitled for any enhancement of compensation. A further submission was made that the accident occurred due to the negligent act on the part of the rider of the motor cycle. It is also submitted that the offending vehicle autorickshaw had no fitness certificate. Lastly, he urged that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side. Therefore, learned counsel sought for dismissal of the appeal. 11. While arguing the matter, learned counsel appearing for the claimant as well as for the insurance company submitted that appeal may be disposed of by awarding a global compensation. 12. I have heard the contentions and submissions put forth by learned counsels for the respective parties and perused the material on record. 13. The present appeal is filed seeking enhancement of compensation. It is not in dispute that the accident occurred on 25.12.2008 and the claimant was a pillion rider. The offending vehicle i.e., autorickshaw came at a high speed and hit the motor cycle causing grievous injuries to the claimant. The Insurance Company has not filed the appeal. The material evidence on record would also disclose that the claimant has sustained comminutted fracture lateral condyle tibia left and he was treated as inpatient and undergone surgery. The offending vehicle i.e., autorickshaw came at a high speed and hit the motor cycle causing grievous injuries to the claimant. The Insurance Company has not filed the appeal. The material evidence on record would also disclose that the claimant has sustained comminutted fracture lateral condyle tibia left and he was treated as inpatient and undergone surgery. Taking into consideration of the submission made by learned counsels, the claimant is entitled for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand Only) as global compensation. The second respondent - Insurance Company is directed to pay global compensation of Rs.25,000/- only, along with interest 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization and the same shall be deposited within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The entire compensation shall be released in favour of the claimant on proper identification. Accordingly, appeal is disposed of. Office is directed to transmit the original records to the concerned Tribunal forthwith. Registry is hereby directed to draw up the award accordingly. No order as to costs.