Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1711 (KAR)

Devanna v. Naveen @ Naveen Kumar

2020-09-04

N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

body2020
JUDGMENT S M Subramaniam, J. 1. The judgment and decree dated 30.07.2018 passed in M.C.O.P. No.5328 of 2016 by the learned Special Sub Judge No.I, Special Sub Small Causes Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chennai, is under challenge in the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 2. The claimant, who is the appellant herein, filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. The accident occurred on 04.08.2016 at about 09.30 P.M., at Ennore Express Road near Ondikuppam, Thiruvotriyur, Chennai. The Traffic Investigation Washermenpet Range, Chennai, registered a case in Crime No.151 of 2016. 4. The appellant-claimant was a pedestrian in Ennore Express Road and due to the accident, he sustained fractures in left temporal parietal region, fracture in left lateral wall of chest and multiple grievous injuries all over the body. The appellant-claimant had taken treatment at the Government Stanley Hospital at Chennai and thereafter continued his treatment as outpatient. 5. The claim petition was filed by the appellant-claimant and the second respondent/Insurance Company defended the claim petition. 6. The Tribunal adjudicated the issues with reference to the documents as well as the evidences produced. 7. As far as the negligence aspect is concerned, there is no dispute between the parties in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. The Tribunal arrived a conclusion that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry. Thus, the second respondent-Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation to the appellant-claimant. 8. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed by the appellant- claimant mainly seeking enhancement of compensation on the ground that the disability compensation granted by the Tribunal is inadequate. The appellant-claimant sustained fractures and had taken treatment. The Doctor assessed the disability at 10%. However, the Tribunal has taken only 5% and awarded a sum of Rs.3,000/- per percentage for disability. Thus, the appellant-claimant has chosen to file the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 9. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the second respondent-Insurance Company disputed the contentions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-claimant, by stating that the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant-claimant are not so grievous and the Tribunal has fixed the compensation, considering the treatment taken as well as the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant-claimant. Thus, there is no perversity and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is to be dismissed. 10. Thus, there is no perversity and the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is to be dismissed. 10. This Court is of the considered opinion that as per the evidence of PW-1 as well as the Discharge Summary issued by the Government Stanley Medical Hospital, the appellant-claimant sustained fractures of left lateral 6th and 7th ribs, contusion over occipital region and sutured wound over the occipital region of the scalp, the injury appears to be grievous in nature. 11. The Doctor assessed the disability at 10%. Considering the nature of treatment taken as well as the injuries sustained by the appellant-claimant, the Tribunal has committed an error in reducing the disability percentage from 10% to 5%. In fact, the compensation ought to have granted for disability by the Tribunal is 10%. Moreover, the accident occurred during the year 2016 and fixing a sum of Rs.3,000/- per percentage is on the lower side. Thus, this Court is of the considered opinion that a sum of Rs.5,000/- is fixed per percentage for disability. Accordingly, the award of the Tribunal stands modified as detailed hereunder:- Rs. Disability (Rs.5,000/-x10) 50,000/- Pain and Sufferings 20,000/- Transportation Charges 5000/- Medical Expenses 1,000/- Extra Nourishment 10,000/- Attender Charges 1,000/- Loss of Earnings 14,000/- Loss of future prospects 10,000/- Total 10,000/- Thus, the appellant/claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.1,11,000/- with accrued interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum. 12. The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire award amount along with accrued interest, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and on such deposit being made, the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire award amount by filing an appropriate application before the Tribunal and payments are to be made through RTGS. 13. Accordingly, the judgment and decree dated 30.07.2018 passed in M.C.O.P. No.5328 of 2016 by the learned Special Sub Judge No.I, Special Sub Small Causes Court-cum-Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chennai, stands modified and consequently, CMA No.2702 of 2019 is allowed in part. However, there shall be no order as to costs.