Karnataka High Court
Naseema Begum @ Naseema vs Mohammed Altaf on 18 November, 2013
Author: B.S.Indrakala
Bench: B.S. Indrakala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Dated this the 18th day of November 2013
Before
The Hon'ble Mrs. Justice B.S. INDRAKALA
Miscellaneous First Appeal No.502/2010 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Naseema Begum @ Naseema,
W/o Late Shoukath Ali,
Aged about 44 years.
2. Kum. S.Sheem Begum,
D/o Late Shoukath Ali,
Aged about 24 years.
3. S.Mir Zaheer Abbas,
S/o Late Shoukath Ali,
Aged about 21 years.
All are R/at 2nd Cross,
Shamhin Shaw Nagar, Kolar.
... Appellants
(By Smt. Suguna R. Reddy and Sri C.N.Raghavendra,
Advocates.)
AND:
1. Mr.Mohammed Altaf,
Major in age, R/at No.34,
Mir Bakshi Ali Street,
Chennai, Tamilnadu.
2. The Branch Manager,
United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Branch Office, Baglur Mansion,
Doddapet, Kolar.
... Respondents
2
(By Sri K.N.Srinivas, Advocate for R-2; Sri R.R.Patil,
Advocate for R-1.)
This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section
173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated:
19.09.2009 passed in MVC No.431/2007 on the file of the
Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court-I, MACT, Kolar, partly
allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking
enhancement of compensation.
This appeal coming on for admission this day, the
Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
Though the matter is posted for admission, with the consent of the learned Counsel for both parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.
2. The above appeal is preferred by the claimants against the judgment and award dated 19.9.2009 passed in MVC No. 431/2007 on the file of the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court and MACT, Kolar interalia contending amongst other grounds that the amount of compensation awarded needs to be enhanced and further contended that as the pillion rider of the vehicle is covered under the conditions of the policy, the 3 respondent/insurer should be held liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle.
3. The brief facts leading to the above appeal are that on 6.2.2007 at about 9.00 p.m. at N.H.4 while Shoukath Ali and his relative Miralikouser were proceeding towards Kolar from Bangalore on the Bajaj Motor cycle bearing registration No. TN-04/K-5260 near Kamath Hotel, one unknown vehicle driven by its driver came in a rash manner and dashed against the hind portion of bike on account of which the said Shoukath Ali who was the pillion rider of the said vehicle died at the spot on account of the injuries suffered by him and in the circumstances, the claimants claiming themselves as wife and children of the said Shoukath Ali preferred MVC No. 431/2007 under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation contending that the deceased at the time when he met with the accident was aged about 45 years, doing business with an income of Rs.3000/- p.m. and hence, they sought compensation from the respondents. 4
4. To prove their case, the claimant No.1 got herself examined as P.W.1 besides examining the rider of the vehicle involved in the accident as P.W.2 and got marked Exs.P.1 to 9. On behalf of the respondents, no evidence is adduced nor any document is got marked.
5. The Tribunal on appreciation of the evidence so lead in by the parties, deemed it fit to award a sum of Rs.3,15,600/- against respondent No.1, exonerating the liability of respondent No.2 insurer to indemnify the said owner of the vehicle.
6. Aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the claimants are in appeal interalia contending amongst other grounds that the amount of compensation awarded by taking into consideration the notional income at Rs.28,800/- p.a. is not proper and further contended that the deceased being the pillion rider, the 2nd respondent/insurer is liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle 1st respondent.
5
7. The learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the vehicle was covered with the package (comprehensive) policy and as such the pillion rider of the vehicle is covered under the terms and conditions of the policy.
8. Per contra, learned Counsel for the insurer submitted that on the basis of the evidence lead in by the claimants, the amount of compensation awarded at Rs.3,15,600/- is just and proper and the same does not call for any interference.
9. Thus the death of victim in the accident involving the motor bike bearing registration No. TN- 04/K 5260 belonging to the 1st respondent insured with the 2nd respondent is not in dispute.
10. In the absence of evidence, the Tribunal has assessed the notional income of the victim at Rs.80/- per day ( (Rs.28,800/- p.a.). In this regard, taking into consideration the year of the accident as 2007 even 6 notionally his income can be easily assessed at Rs.3,000/- p.m. (Rs.36,000/- p.a.)
11. Admittedly there are 3 dependents and taking into consideration the same, 1/3rd will have to be deducted towards personal expenses of the victim himself in which event, considering the age of the victim as 45 years as evidenced in the postmortem report Ex.P.3, the appellants/claimants are entitled to be compensated under head loss of dependency at (Rs.2,000/- x 12 x 14) Rs.3,36,000/- to which sum it is also reasonable to add Rs.15,000/- towards conventional heads like loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, loss of estate, funeral expenses. Thus the claimants are entitled to be compensated at Rs.3,51,000/-.
12. The fact that the deceased was a pillion rider of the motorbike involved in the accident is not in dispute and as per the notification dated November 16th, 2009 issued by the Insurance Regulatory and 7 Development Authority wherein it is made clear that as per the Circular bearing No. MOT/GEN/10 dated 2nd June, 1986 the pillion rider carried on two wheeler is covered under the Standard Motor Package Policy. Admittedly the vehicle was covered with the said package policy (Comprehensive Policy) (vide policy bearing No. 011100/31/06/01/00006716) for a period between 13.10.2006 and 12.10.2007 during which period the alleged accident occurred and as such the 2nd respondent/insurer is liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle. Hence the following:
ORDER The above appeal is allowed in part awarding compensation at Rs.3,51,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization as against Rs.3,15,600/- awarded by the Tribunal.
The respondent/insurer is liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle and is directed to deposit the said amount so awarded within 8 weeks from the date of 8 receipt of the copy of this judgment and award and on such deposit, a sum of Rs.1,51,000/- with proportionate interest is directed to be apportioned in favour of appellant No.1 and Rs.1 lakh with proportionate interest each is apportioned in favour of appellant Nos. 2 and 3. Out of the sum so apportioned, Rs.75,000/- with proportionate interest with regard to all the three appellants is ordered to be invested in fixed deposit in the name of appellant Nos. 2 and 3 in any of the nationalized bank of their choice for a period of 5 years with liberty to them to withdraw 50% of the periodical interest as and when the same accrues and the balance of the interest shall be released at the time of maturity of the said fixed deposit.
The balance amount of Rs.76,000/- with regard to appellant No.1 and Rs.25,000/- each with regard to appellant Nos. 2 and 3 with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the respective appellant for their immediate necessity.9
Office to draw the award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Nsu/-