Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
M.F.A. NO.203/2015 (MV – D) C/W. M.F.A. NO.171/2015 (MV – D) M.F.A. NO.174/2015 (MV – D) M.F.A. NO.172/2015 (MV – D) M.F.A. NO.173/2015 (MV – D)
IN M.F.A. NO.203/2015
BETWEEN:
LEGAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, NO.28, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE)
AND:
GEETHA RAMAKRISHNA W/O LATE RAMAKRISHNA
NOW AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
TEJAS B.R. S/O RAMAKRISHNA NOW AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS,
(AMENDED AS PER THE COURT ORDER DATED 31.03.2021)
KUMARI BINDHU B.R., D/O RAMAKRISHNA B.S. NOW AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 ARE SINCE MINOR REP. BY MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN 1ST RESPONDENT R/AT NO. 126, 6TH MAIN, 3RD STAGE, 3RD MAIN, 1ST BLOCK, 1ST CROSS, KATRIGUPPE, BENGALURU – 85.
JAVARAMMA W/O LATE SANNAPPA @ ANKAIAH, SINCE DEAD HER LRS ARE ALREADY ON RECORD I.E., R1 TO R3.
SINCE DEAD, HER LRs. WHO ARE ALREADY ON RECORD I.E., R1 TO R3.
(AMENDED AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 13.04.2016)
SMT. GOWRI W/O NARENDRA BABU, R/AT NO. 1235, 3RD CROSS, 30TH MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU – 70.
P. RAGHUNATH S/O PERUMAL, AGE: MAJOR,
R/AT NEAR TVS COACH DIVISION, VADUGAPATTI, VIRALIMALAI, ILLUPPUR TALUK, PUDUKKOTTAI DIST, TAMILNADU STATE - 600 078.
THE MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., HUB NO. 902, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, 2ND FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 01. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI A.S.GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1 TO R3; SRI G.S.MARULAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R7; SERVICE OF NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT TO R5 VIDE ORDER DATED 31.3.2021 )
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 9.9.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.1007/2012 ON THE FILE OF 8TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, 33RD ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.22,35,000/- WITH INTERST @ 8% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION OF SAME FROM RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 JOINTLY ARE SEVERALLY.
IN M.F.A. NO.171/2015
BETWEEN:
LEGAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, NO.28, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
B.R.LINGARAJA S/O B.T. RAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.113, KAVERI NADI RPAD, BHIRNDAVAN NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 019.
SMT.GOWRI W/O NARENDRA BABU, R/AT NO.1235, 3RD CROSS, 30TH MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU – 70.
P. RAGHUNATH S/O PERUMAL, AGE: MAJOR, R/AT NEAR TVS COACH DIVISION, VADUGAPATTI, VIRALIMALAI, ILLUPPUR TALUK, PUDUKKOTTAI DIST., TAMILNADU STATE – 600 072.
THE MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD, HUB NO.92, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, 2ND FLOOR, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU – 01. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI L.T.GOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI G.S.MARULAIAH, ADVCOATE FOR R4; R3 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R2 HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 01.06.2017)
MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 9.9.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.332/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 8TH ADDITIONAL SMALL
CAUSES JUDGE, 33RD ACMM, MEMBER-MACT, BANGALORE, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.2,90,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 8% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION OF SAME FROM RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 JOINTLY & SEVERALLY.
IN M.F.A. NO.174/2015
BETWEEN:
LEGAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING NO.28, M G ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
MASTER DHANUSH GOWDA B.G., S/O M.G.GIRISH, NOW AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS, SINCE MINOR REP. BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN M.G.GIRISH S/O GOWDAIAH, NOW AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, NO.277, BYRAPPA NILAYA, GANGANADI ROAD, BHIRNDAVAN NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 019.
SMT.GOWRI W/O NARENDRA BABU, R/AT NO.1235, 3RD CROSS, 30TH MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU – 70.
P.RAGHUNATH S/O PERUMAL, AGE MAJOR, R/AT NEAR TVS COACH DIVISION, VADUGAPATTI, VIRALIMALAI, ILLUPPUR TALUK PUDUKKOTTAI DIST. TAMILNADU STATE – 600 072.
THE MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., HUB NO.92, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, 2ND FLOOR, M G ROAD, BENGALURU – 01. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI L.T.GOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI G.S.MARULAIAH, ADVCOATE FOR R4; R3 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R2 HELD SUFFICIENT)
MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 9.9.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.335/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, XXXIII ACMM, MEMBER-MACT, BANGALORE, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.1,50,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 8% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN M.F.A. NO.172/2015
BETWEEN:
LEGAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING NO.28, M G ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
MASTER DHANUSH GOWDA B.G., S/O M.G.GIRISH, NOW AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS, SINCE MINOR REP. BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN M.G.GIRISH S/O GOWDAIAH, NOW AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, NO.277, BYRAPPA NILAYA, GANGANADI ROAD, BHIRNDAVAN NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 019.
SMT.GOWRI W/O NARENDRA BABU, R/AT NO.1235, 3RD CROSS, 30TH MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAGE, BENGALURU – 70.
P.RAGHUNATH S/O PERUMAL, AGE MAJOR, R/AT NEAR TVS COACH DIVISION, VADUGAPATTI, VIRALIMALAI, ILLUPPUR TALUK PUDUKKOTTAI DIST. TAMILNADU STATE – 600 072.
THE MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., HUB NO.92, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, 2ND FLOOR, M G ROAD, BENGALURU – 01. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI L.T.GOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI G.S.MARULAIAH, ADVCOATE FOR R4; R3 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R2 HELD SUFFICIENT)
MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 9.9.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.335/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, XXXIII ACMM, MEMBER-MACT, BANGALORE, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.1,50,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 8% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN M.F.A. NO.173/2015
BETWEEN:
LEGAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING NO.28, M G ROAD BENGALURU - 560001 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
M.G.GIRISH S/O GOWDAIAH NOW AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS NO.277, BYRAPPA NILAYA GANGANADI ROAD, BHIRNDAVAN NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 019
SMT. GOWRI W/O NARENDRA BABU R/AT NO.1235, 3RD CROSS
30TH MAIN ROAD, BSK II STAE BENGALURU – 560 070
P RAGHUNATH S/O PERUMAL AGE MAJOR R/AT NEAR TVS COACH DIVISION VADUGAPATTI VIRALIMALAI ILLUPPUR TALUK PUDUKKOTTAI DIST TAMILNADU STAGE 600 072
THE MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD., HUB NO.902 MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS 2ND FLOOR, M G ROAD BENGALURU - 01. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI L.T.GOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI G.S.MARULAIAH, ADVCOATE FOR R4; R3 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED; SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R2 HELD SUFFICIENT)
MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED9.9.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.334/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 8TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, 33RD ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.1,00,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 8% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
THESE M.F.As. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
COMMON JUDGMENT
All these appeals have been filed by the Insurance Company against the common judgment dated 09.09.2014, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Channapatna (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for short).
Since all the appeals arise out of the same accident and the very same judgment of the claims Tribunal, they are being heard together and common judgment is being passed in all the appeals.
MFA No.203/2015 arises out of MVC.No.1007/2012 due to death of B.S.Ramakrishna, MFA.No.171/2015 arises out of MVC.No.332/2012 due to the injuries sustained by claimant - B.R.Lingaraja, MFA.No.174/2015 arises out of MVC.No.335/2012 due to the injuries sustained by claimant - Master Dhanush Gowda B.G., MFA.No.172/2015 arises out of MVC.No.333/2012 due to the injuries sustained by claimant - Master Gaurav L. and MFA.No.173/2015 arises out of
MVC.No.334/2012 due to the injuries sustained by the claimant - M.G.Girish.
Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that, on 04.12.2011, at about 2.30 a.m., when the deceased B.S.Ramakrishna along with the injured persons were traveling in a Tempo Traveller bearing registration No.KA-05/AB-4869 from Shabarimala towards Bengaluru, when they reached near Spinning Mill, Sathanur Deviation Road, Salem, the driver of the Tempo Traveller drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the Lorry bearing registration No.TN-55/H-8947. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the deceased B.S.Ramakrishna succumbed to the injuries as well as other persons namely, B.R.Lingaraja, Master Dhanush Gowda B.G., Master Gaurav L. and M.G.Girish, sustained injuries in the aforesaid accident.
There upon, the claimants filed respective claim petitions under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) inter alia, on
the ground that the accident took place only due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the Tempo Traveller.
In MVC.No.1007/2012, the claimants pleaded that the deceased was aged about 44 years, a businessman doing hardware business and earning Rs.4,00,000/- p.a. after deducting income tax and other expenses. Hence, they pleaded to award suitable compensation along with interest. In MVC.No.332/2012, the injured - B.R.Lingaraja aged about 41 years and in MVC.No.334/2012, the injured M.G.Girish aged about 36 years at the time of accident sustained injuries in the aforesaid accident and claimed suitable compensation with interest. In MVC.Nos.333/2012 and 335/2012, the claimants being minors namely Master Gaurav L. and Master Dhanush Gowda B.G., aged 11 years and 6 years respectively sustained injuries in the aforesaid accident and filed the claim petitions through their next friend claiming suitable compensation.
The owners of both the Tempo Traveller and the Lorry neither appeared nor filed objections and hence, the Tribunal placed them exparte. The Insurance Companies of
both Tempo Traveller and the Lorry appeared through their respective counsel and filed statement of objections. The Insurance Company of the Tempo Traveller in its objections inter alia pleaded that the deceased and the injured persons were traveling in the Tempo Traveller was hit by an unknown vehicle which was driven in rash and negligent driving by its driver. The averments made in the claim petitions were denied and also the accident as well as the rash and negligent driving of the Tempo Traveller were denied. It was also pleaded that the amount of compensation which is claimed by the claimants is excessive and exorbitant.
The claimants in order to prove their case, examined five witnesses, namely, B.R.Lingaraja, B.R.Lingaraja, M.G.Girish, M.G.Girish and Dr.Ramachandra as PWs.1 to 5 in MVC.Nos.332 to 335 of 2012 and Smt.Geetha Ramakrishna and another B.R.Lingaraja as witnesses in MVC.No.1007 of 2012 and got marked 34 documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P34 in MVC.Nos.332 to 335 of 2012 and 23 documents as Ex.P.1 to P.23 in MVC.No.1007/2012. The respondents examined two witnesses, namely, A.M.Shekaraiah and H.B.Guruprasad as
RWs.1 and 2 in MVC.Nos.332 to 335 of 2012 and A.M.Shekaraiah as RW.1 in MVC.No.1007/2012 and got marked 5 documents as Exs.R.1 to R.5 in all the claim petitions. The Claims Tribunal on the basis of the pleadings of the parties, framed the issues, recorded common evidence and vide its common judgment dated 09.09.2014, inter alia held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending Tempo Traveller, by which B.S.Ramakrishna died and aforesaid persons sustained injuries. The claims tribunal awarded compensation to the claimants in their respective petitions. In the aforesaid factual background, the Insurance Company has filed these appeals.
Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has urged a common ground in all the appeals that the claims tribunal failed to appreciated the fact that the driver of Tempo Traveller had dashed the Lorry from behind and the driver of the Lorry had applied brake all of a sudden on the highway. Therefore, the aforesaid accident has taken place on account of rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its
driver. The Tribunal ought to have held the driver of the Tempo Traveller liable for contributory negligence only to the extent of 50% for causing the accident. He further submitted that in MFA.No.203/2015 which pertains to the death of B.S.Ramakrishna, the claims Tribunal has erred in taking into account the rental income of the deceased as mentioned in Exs.P.16 to P.17 i.e., the income tax returns, treating the same to be the income of the deceased. It is further submitted that the amount of compensation awarded is excessive.
By referring to facts in MFA.No.171/2015, which pertains to the injuries sustained by B.R.Lingaraja, he submitted that the Tribunal erred in awarding a sum of Rs.1,00.000/- towards pain and suffering, which is on the higher side and Rs.50,000/- each towards loss of amenities and permanent disability and the Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation only towards one head instead of both heads. In MFA.No.174/2015, which also pertains to the injuries sustained by Master Dhanush Gowda B.G., he submits that the amount of compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-
awarded towards pain and sufferings and the rate of interest at 8% p.a. is also on the higher side. In MFA.No.172/2015, which pertains to the injuries sustained by Master Gaurav L., he submits that the compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- awarded towards pain and sufferings and Rs.1,00,000/- awarded towards future medical expenses is also on the higher side. Referring to MFA.No.173/2015, which pertains to the injuries sustained by M.G.Girish, he submitted that the rate of interest at 8% p.a. awarded on the amount of compensation is on the higher side. He submits that the rate of interest should be restricted only to 6% p.a. in all the cases instead of 8% p.a. awarded by the Tribunal.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the claimants submits that in MFA.No.203/2015, the claimants had produced returns of income tax of the deceased for the years 2007 - 2008 to 2011 - 2012 as per Exs.P.15 to P.19. Therefore, the average income as reflected in the aforesaid returns should have been taken by the Tribunal. It is further submitted that the amount of compensation is just and proper and does not call for interference in these appeals.
Learned counsel for the New India Assurance Company Limited in MFA.No.203/2015, supported the findings recorded by the claims Tribunal and submitted that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the Tempo Traveller by its driver.
We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. It is well settled law that in motor accident cases, the claimants are required to prove the accident on the basis of preponderance of probabilities has held by the Supreme Court in the case of MANGALA RAM VS. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. reported in (2018) 5 SCC 656. In the background of the aforesaid legal position, we may advert to the facts of the case.
The claimants in order to prove their respective cases examined the injured persons, namely B.R.Lingaraja and M.G.Girish, in support of their case that the accident took place only on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Tempo Traveller. It is pertinent to mention
that the Insurance Company of the Tempo Traveller has neither examined the driver of the Tempo Traveller nor the driver of the Lorry. It is also to be noted that the FIR was lodged against the driver of the Tempo Traveller and the charge sheet was filed against him. The Tribunal at paragraph Nos.12 and 13 of its judgment has recorded a finding that the accident took place only due to rash and negligent driving of the Tempo Traveller. The aforesaid finding is recorded by the Tribunal after meticulous appreciation of the material on record which does not call for any interference in this appeal.
Now, we may advert to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in all the cases. In MFA.No.203/2015 arising out of MVC.No.1007/2012, the claims Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.2,00,000/- p.a. and awarded a sum of Rs.22,35,000/- as compensation along with interest at 8% p.a. We have perused the income tax return filed by the claimants in order to prove the income of the deceased namely B.S.Ramakrishna. There is no loss of rental income on
account of the death of the deceased and the same cannot be a ground to assess the income of the deceased as this fact is already considered by the Tribunal. As per the returns for the year 2009 - 2010, the business income is shown as Rs.1,13,482/- and for the year 2010 – 2011, it is shown as Rs.1,77,411/-. Therefore, the average income of the deceased can be assessed at Rs.1,45,447/- p.a. Hence, the monthly income comes to Rs.12,121/- and 25% is required to be added to the aforesaid amount on account of future prospects in view of the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in ‘NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS’ AIR 2017 SC 5157’. Thus, the monthly income comes to Rs.15,151/- (Rs.12,121/- + Rs.3,030/-). Out of which, we deem it appropriate to deduct 1/4th towards personal expenses as dependents are four in number and therefore, the monthly dependency comes to Rs.11,363/-. Taking into account the age of the deceased, who was aged 44 years at the time of the accident, multiplier of ‘14’ has to be adopted. Therefore, the claimants are entitled to Rs.19,08,984/- (Rs.11,363/- x 12 x 14) on account of loss of dependency.
In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. NANU RAM & ORS. reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, which has been subsequently clarified in the case of UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. SATINDER KAUR AND ORS. reported in AIR 2020 SC 3076, each of the claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- on account of loss of love and affection. Thus, the claimants are held entitled to Rs.1,60,000/-. In addition, claimants are held entitled to Rs.30,000/- on account of loss of estate and funeral expenses. Thus, in all, the claimants are entitled to the total compensation of Rs.20,98,984/-. However, the rate of interest is scaled down from 8% p.a. to 6% p.a., as awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, the aforesaid total amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.
In MFA.No.171/2015 arising out of MVC.No.332/2012, the injured B.R.Lingaraja, aged about 41 years, had sustained the injuries namely, two sutured
wounds over left cheek, contusion over right upper arm, SCH of left eye, mid shaft of right humerus, fracture of left 5th, 6th and 7th ribs and undisplaced fracture of left zygomatic bone, depressed fracture poster- lateral wall of left maxillary sinus and fracture lateral and inferior wall of left orbit. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.50,000/- each under two separate heads namely, towards loss of amenities and disability instead of one head. Hence, we award a sum of Rs.75,000/- only under the head loss of amenities. Therefore, the total amount of compensation is restricted to Rs.2,65,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
Insofar as it concerns to MFA.No.174/2015 arising out of MVC.No.335/2012, the minor injured Master Dhanush Gowda B.G., aged about 6 years, had sustained injuries namely, laceration 1 cm x 1 cm over lower jaw, left eye ecchymosis with superficial lacerations, laceration 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm over lateral lower, laceration below left eye, fracture left angle and ramus of mandible and splenic laceration, left arena upper pole laceration with peri and paranial
haemoperitoneum.
Therefore, we hold that the compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case is just and proper. However, the rate of interest is scaled down to 6% p.a. from 8% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization.
In MFA.No.172/2015 arising out of MVC.No.333/2012, the another minor injured namely, Master Gaurav L., was aged about 11 years at the time of the accident and was a student. He had sustained the injuries namely, cerebral concussion and B/L traumatic 6th nerve palsy and the Tribunal considering the facts of the case has awarded a sum of Rs.2,92,000/- as compensation which is just and proper and does not call for interference. However, the rate of interest is scaled down to 6% p.a. from 8% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization.
Coming to MFA.No.173/2015 arising out of MVC.No.334/2015, which pertains to the injured claimant - MG.Girish, had sustained the injuries namely, abrasion over nose and contusion over left hemithorax, sutured wound dorsum of both feet, sub- conjunctival of both eyes, fracture
of right zygomatic bone, fracture lateral and inferior wall of right orbit, fracture of right nasal bone and nasal septum, undisplaced fracture walls of maxillary sinus with hemosnus and fracture of left sterygoid plaate. Owing to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, which is just and proper and any interference in this regard is unwarranted. However, the rate of interest is scaled down to 6% p.a. from 8% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization.
To the aforesaid extent, the judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Claims Tribunal.
Accordingly, the appeals filed by the Insurance Company are partly allowed.
Sd/- JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE nvj