The court held that compensation awarded for injury claims must reflect actual income loss and disability, ensuring justice and equity in the award.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL JUDGMENT

1. MFA No.200132/2021 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement, and MFA No.201143/2021 is filed by Insurance company challenging its liability to pay compensation as awarded in Judgment and award dated 10.08.2020 passed in MVC No.360/2017 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Bidar (for short ‘the tribunal’).

2. The facts leading to filing of the claim petition are as follows:

HC-KAR The claimant and her husband Siddappa have boarded an auto-rickshaw bearing registration No.KA-39/4677 along with other persons on 14.08.2016. When the said auto- rickshaw came near Nirna Cross, a Goods Van bearing registration No.MH-04/FJ-3468 came from opposite side and the driver of the said vehicle was driving the said vehicle in a high speed, rash and negligent manner, he lost control over it and dashed against the said auto-rickshaw, due to which the claimant and others sustained injuries. The claimant filed claim petition seeking compensation. The tribunal assessed the compensation and passed the award. The claimant has preferred appeal seeking enhancement of the award amount. The Insurance company has challenged its liability to pay compensation on the ground that, the driver of the offending vehicle had no valid driving license as on the date of the accident and the interest awarded at 9% is exorbitant.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and the learned counsel for the Insurance company.

HC-KAR

4. Learned counsel for the claimant would contend that, the claimant was aged 31 years and she was an agricultural labourer and the accident has taken place in the year 2016. As per the chart prepared by the Legal Services Authority for settlement of disputes in the Lok Adalath, the notional income fixed for the year 2016 is Rs.8,750/- and the tribunal has erred in taking the income at Rs.6,000/- per month. He further submits that, P.W.3 – Doctor who has issued Ex.P.32-disablity certificate has stated that, the claimant is having 43% disability of limb and the tribunal has erred in taking the disability for whole body at 10%. He submits that, the claimant has sustained fracture of mid shaft of right humerus and injury to an eye and she was admitted in the hospital for 37 days. Considering the same, the compensation awarded for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, loss of income during laid up period, attendant charges, are on lower side and requires enhancement.

5. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that, the Insurance company has already satisfied its liability in another claim petition, arising out of the same accident in HC-KAR MVC No.620/2017 and deposited the entire award amount with interest and therefore, it is estopped from taking the contention that, it is not liable to pay the compensation amount on the ground that, the driver of the offending vehicle is not holding valid and effective driving licence as on the date of the accident.

6. Learned counsel for the Insurance company would contend that, the tribunal has assessed disability at 10% properly. The compensation awarded under the other heads are just and proper. The driver of the offending vehicle was holding LMV (TR) license and he was driving heavy goods vehicle and there is a violation of policy condition and therefore, the Insurance company is not liable for payment of compensation awarded.

7. Having heard the learned counsels, this Court has perused the impugned Judgment and other documents placed on record.

8. Ex.R.3 is the extract of driving licence of the driver of the offending vehicle i.e. MH-04/FJ-3468. As per HC-KAR the said document, the driver of the offending vehicle was authorized to drive LMV (TR) veh