1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 30^TH DAY OF JULY, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR

M.F.A. No.8232/2016

BETWEEN:

SRI GIRISH T.K.,

S/O KUMAR,

AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,

R/O BELAGUMBA TOTA,

BELAGUMBA ROAD,

TUMKUR TOWN.

… APPELLANT

(BY SHRI RAMESH K.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.

SRI SRINIVAS,

S/O SIDDAIAH,

AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,

R/O NO.282, VYASARA PALYA,

HANUMANTHAPURA,

NEAR EURO KID SCHOOL,

TUMKUR – 572 101.

2.

THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,

1^ST FLOOR, RAJA COMPLEX,

AMBEDKAR ROAD, SIRA TOWN,

TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 101.

2

REPRESENTED BY ITS

BRANCH MANAGER.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SHRI K.N. SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R2;

NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH

V/O DATED 10.11.2017)

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV

ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED

08.09.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.1208/2015 ON THE FILE

OF THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,

MEMBER,

ADDITIONAL

MACT,

TUMAKURU,

PARTLY

ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION

AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS

DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

JUDGMENT

Heard Sri. Ramesh K.R., learned advocate for the

claimant and Sri. K. N. Srinivas, learned advocate for

the respondent No.2 - Insurer.

2.

This appeal is presented by an injured

claimant challenging the judgment and decree dated

08.09.2016 passed in M.V.C.No.1208/2015 on the file

of the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge and

Member, AMACT, Tumkur, seeking enhancement of

compensation.

3

3.

Sri. Ramesh K. R., learned Advocate for the

claimant has urged the following grounds:

• that the Tribunal has reckoned the earning

capacity of the claimant at Rs.7,500/- per month

for the accident that has occurred in the year

2015. The claimant is entitled for consideration of

his income at Rs.9,000/- per month; and

• that the claimant has suffered fracture of 1/3^rd

right tibia. The Tribunal has awarded only

Rs.15,250/- as “loss of income during treatment

period”. The claimant could not work for 4

months. Therefore, the quantum of compensation

on this head requires enhancement.

4.

Sri. K. N. Srinivas, learned advocate for the

insurer does not oppose the above grounds urged by the

learned advocate for the claimant.

4

5.

I

have

carefully

considered

the

rival

contentions and perused the records.

6.

The accident has taken place in the year

2015. This Court has consistently considered earning

capacity of an able bodied person in the year 2015 as

Rs.9,000/- p.m. Therefore, learned advocate for the

claimant is right in his submission that earning

capacity of claimant ought to have been considered as

Rs.9,000/- per month.

7.

In the circumstances, the claimant shall be

entitled for consideration of his income at Rs.9,000/-

per month. He shall also be entitled for compensation

towards “loss of income during treatment period” for 4

months at the rate of Rs.9,000/- per month.

8.

In the circumstances, the quantum of

compensation is re-computed as follows:

5

Compensation under

different Heads

As awarded

by the

Tribunal

(Rs.)

As awarded

by this

Court

(Rs.)

Pain and sufferings

60,000/-

60,000/-

Loss of amenities and

future prospects

30,000/-

30,000/-

Towards treatment

2,28,789/-

2,28,789/-

Medical Expenses

83,558/-

83,558/-

Future treatment

40,000/-

40,000/-

Loss of future income due

to disability

2,43,000/-

2,91,600/-

(1350x12x18)

Attendant charges

10,000/-

10,000/-

Transportation charges

10,000/-

10,000/-

Food and Nourishment

charges

10,000/-

10,000/-

Loss of income during

treatment period

15,250/-

36,000/-

(9000x4)

Total

7,30,597/-

7,99,947/-

Enhanced compensation

69,350/-

7.

Hence, the following order:

(i)

The appeal is allowed in part.

6

(ii)

The

compensation

is

enhanced

by

Rs.