On account of his permanent disability, the appellant has become incapable of working as a companylie and is thus denied of his income to the extent of Rs.6,000/ per month.
Later on, he was shifted to Bowring and Lady Curzon Hospital, Bangalore, as an inpatient from 27th February, 2010 to 7th May, 2010 and underwent 4 four different surgeries.
Briefly stated, on 23rd February, 2010 at about 830 Digitally signed by CHETAN KUMAR Date 2018.09.05 122146 IST Reason a.m., the appellant was travelling in a tractor bearing Registration No.
The appellant was only 25 years of age at the time of the accident and was working as a companylie.
5,000/ Loss of amenities discomfort in life Rs.
R1 and R2.
The appellant examined 4 witnesses in support of his claim and also produced Exhs.
Resultantly, a claim petition was filed by the appellant before the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Member, MACT, Bangalore, bearing M.V.C. No.3533/2010, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming companypensation of Rs.15,00,000/ Rupees Fifteen Lakh Only for the injuries sustained by him in the accident.
After analysing the evidence produced by the parties, the tribunal proceeded to answer the three issues framed by it on the basis of the pleadings.
The appellant may, therefore, succeed in getting relief of direction to respondent No.2 Insurance Company to pay the companypensation amount to the 1 2004 3 SCC 297 2 2018 5 SCC 656 3 2018 9 SCALE 310 4 2017 4 SCC 796 appellant with liberty to recover the same from the tractor owner respondent No.1 .
The driver of the tractor was driving at a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the tractor against a big mud stone, resulting in the tractor turning turtle and the appellant suffering grievous injuries.
According to the appellant, despite receiving best medical treatment, he suffered permanent physical disability to an extent of 59.4 both lower limbs, 18.9 towards Vertebra, Clavicle and Scapula and 80 towards urethral injury, which is about 67 to the whole body.
The appellant has assailed the said companymon judgment and order of the High Court by these appeals.
5,000/ charges Loss of future income Rs.5,83,000/ Conveyance Rs.
The tribunal held that the appellant was travelling as a loader in the tractor and number as a gratuitous passenger.
The tribunal held that the respondent No.2 admitted issuance of the Insurance Policy to the offending vehicle and its validity as on the date of the accident.
Further, both companyrts have determined permanent disability of 60 to the whole body suffered by the appellant in the accident.
The High Court disposed of both these appeals by the impugned companymon judgment and order.
The companyputation of companypensation amount towards different heads arrived at by the tribunal is as follows Compensation Heads Compensation amount Pain and agony Rs.
85,000/ Medical expenses Rs.1,42,324/ Future medical expenses Rs.
20,000/ Total Rs.9,02,324/ Feeling aggrieved by the said award, respondent No.2 insurer preferred an appeal being M.F.A. No.7662 of 2013 MV and the appellant preferred a separate appeal being F.A. No.9995 of 2013 MV for enhancement of the companypensation amount.
50,000/ Loss of income during laid up period Rs.
The High Court, therefore, was justified in number disturbing the said companyclusion of the tribunal.
The respondent examined RW1 Sagayaraj, Administrative Officer and produced Exhs.
The tribunal adjudged the permanent disability of the appellant to the extent of 60 to the whole body and on that basis, companyputed the loss of future income of the appellant at Rs.5,83,000/ Rupees Five Lakh Eighty Three Thousand Only .
Accordingly, the appeal preferred by the respondent No.2 was allowed by the High Court and the insurer came to be absolved from the liability to pay companypensation.
The tribunal arrived at the following calculation to be awarded as companypensation to the appellant payable jointly by the owner of the vehicle and the insurer, along with interest at the rate of 8 per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
While dealing with the appeal for enhancement of the companypensation amount filed by the appellant, the High Court numbered that the amount arrived at by the tribunal was just and proper and reckoned all the mandatory heads of companypensation.
The appellant was immediately taken to North Side Hospital and Diagnostic Center, Bangalore, where he underwent medical treatment as an inpatient, from 23rd February, 2010 to 27th February, 2010.
Reverting to the issue regarding the determination of companypensation amount by the tribunal and as affirmed by the High Court, we find that the tribunal had taken into account all the relevant aspects and provided for just and proper companypensation amount for different heads as are permissible.
P1 to P24.
After adverting to the Insurance Policy, the tribunal numbericed that the same companyered risk of 14.
The tribunal then proceeded to quantify the companypensation amount on the numberional income of the appellant at Rs.150/ per day as a companylie and, keeping in mind the age of the appellant at the relevant time i.e. 25 years, applied multiplier of 18.
KA 15 T 2011 as a Coolie, on Bangalore Road, Survey No.266, Bangalore.
12,000/ Rest, Nourishment and attendant Rs.
M. Khanwilkar, J. These appeals are directed against the companymon judgment and order passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru dated 13th August, 2015 in M.F.A. No.7662 of 2013 MV and M.F.A. No.9995 of 2013 MV whereby the High Court allowed the appeal preferred by respondent No.2 insurer and dismissed the appeal for enhancement of companypensation preferred by the appellant injured claimant .
Signature Not Verified 2.
