Karnataka High Court
The Manager Shriram General Insurance ... vs Gouravva W/O Siddappa Hanagandi on 26 April, 2018
Bench: Ravi Malimath, S G Pandit
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
ON THE 26TH DAY OF APRIL, 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT
MFA NO.101873 OF 2015 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGER,
SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
NO.302, III FLOOR, S.S.CORNER BUILDING,
PLOT NO.48, HOSPITAL ROAD,
(OPPOSITE BOWRING AND LADY CURZON HOSPITAL)
SHIVAJI NAGAR, BANGALORE-01,
NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
LEGAL CELL, E-8, EPIP, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA,
SITAPURA, JAIPUR-302022, RAJASTHAN STATE.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.S.K.KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. GOURAVVA W/O.SIDDAPPA HANAGANDI,
AGE 32 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. YADAWAD, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
2. KUMAR MAHESH BIN SIDDAPPA HANAGANDI,
AGE 17 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O. YADAWAD, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
:2:
3. KUMARI SAVITA @ SHWETA BIN SIDDAPPA
HANAGANDI, AGE 16 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O. YADAWAD, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
4. KUMAR VENKATESH BIN SIDDAPPA HANAGANDI,
AGE 05 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O. YADAWAD, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
RESPONDENT NOS. 2 TO 4 ARE MINORS
REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL MOTHER
M/G RESPONDENT NO.1
SRI.VIKRAM @ DEVANAGOUDA BIN GIRIGOUDAR
@ GIRIYAPPAGOUDA PATIL,
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS L.RS.
5. SMT.MANJULA W/O.GIRIGOUDA PATIL,
AGE MAJOR, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. WARD NO.2, GOUDAR ONI, YADAWAD,
TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI.
6. SRI.PAVANU BIN SATERI KANAKUMBAKAR,
AGE 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. BAILUR, TQ: KHANAPUR,
DIST: BELAGAVI
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.V.G.BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2-R4 ARE MINORS REP. BY R1; R5 - SERVED;
SMT.GEETHA K.M., ADVOCATE FOR R6
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V. ACT,
1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
02.02.2015, PASSED IN MVC NO.2115 OF 2013 ON THE FILE OF
THE III-ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND
MEMBER IV-ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
BELAGAVI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.29,87,000/-
WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 8% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF
PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
S.G.PANDIT, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
:3:
JUDGMENT
The appellant-insurer is before this Court in this appeal, challenging the quantum of compensation awarded to the claimants in MVC No.2115 of 2013, by judgment and award dated 02.02.2015, on the file of the III-Additional District and Sessions Judge and Member IV-Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi (for short "the Tribunal").
2. As the insurer has questioned only the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, we need not go into any other issues in this appeal.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the claimants are the wife and children of the deceased, who filed the claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- for the death of Siddappa Mayappa Hanagandi. The deceased was proceeding in a car bearing registration No.KA-49/M-2360 from Jamboti to Belagavi. As the driver of the car drove the said vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, he lost control over the car and dashed to the tractor coming from the opposite side. Due to the said accident, the said Siddappa Mayappa Hanagandi suffered grievous injuries and succumbed to :4: the same. It is the case of the claimants that the deceased was aged about 41 years at the time of accident and was an agriculturist, supplying sugarcane to Shri Renuka Sugar Factory and Indian Cane Power Limited. Along with that, he was doing milk vending business, from which he was earning Rs.6,000/- per month. In addition to that he was also working as an agent of PACL Company for sale of cement and was earning a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- p.a. Further, he was also earning a sum of Rs.9,000/- per month by driving a tractor.
4. On issuance of notice, respondent Nos.2 and 3 appeared before the Tribunal. Respondent No.1 was placed exparte. Respondent No.2 filed its objections and respondent No.3 has not filed any objection. Respondent No.2 in its objections denied the averments made in the claim petition and stated that the deceased had violated the terms and conditions of the policy. In support of their claim, claimant No.1 examined herself as PW1 and produced the documents as Exs.P1 to P15. The respondents have not adduced any evidence. Based on the materials available on record, the Tribunal has awarded :5: compensation of Rs.29,87,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
5. We have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties and perused the records.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant-insurer submits that the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is contrary to the material available on record. Further, he submits that the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per month, which is on higher side. It is further submitted that the claimants are not entitled for compensation of 30% towards future prospects, as the deceased was not having fixed income as on the date of accident. It is further submitted that the amount awarded under conventional heads is also on higher side.
7. With regard to the income of the deceased, the first claimant examined herself as PW1. In her evidence she has stated that the deceased was having income from various sources. He was working as a commission agent in PACL Company for sale of cement and receiving commission from the :6: said company; he was supplying sugarcane to Shri Renuka Sugar Factory and Indian Cane Power Limited; during 2012-13 he received a sum of Rs.1,15,600/- towards supply of sugarcane from the Indian Cane Power Limited. She has further stated that Ex.P11 is the RTC to show that the deceased was having landed properties. Based on the same, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per month. Taking into consideration that the accident is of the year 2013, and the nature of work of the deceased, even in the absence of any documentary evidence, income of the deceased could be assessed at Rs.10,000/- per month as against Rs.15,000/- assessed by the Tribunal. Applying the same, deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased, since there were four dependents and adopting the multiplier of 14 to the age of the deceased i.e, 41 years, the loss of dependency would be Rs.12,60,000/- (Rs.10,000/- x 12 x 14 less 1/4th ).
8. Further, the Tribunal has awarded 30% towards future prospects, taking into consideration that the deceased was getting income from various sources. The deceased was a commission agent for PACL India Limited, which deals with cement business. In support of the same, Ex.P15 is produced, :7: which is I.D. Card issued by PACL India Limited. Exs.P9 and 10 are receipts, which indicates that the deceased was selling cement. Further, the deceased had also paid amount towards registration under VAT, as per Ex.P8. All this would go to show that the deceased was having regular income. Hence, granting of future prospects is not disturbed. The claimants are entitled for compensation on the head of future prospects as follows:
Rs.10,000/- x 12 x 14 x ¾ = Rs.4,20,000/-.3
9. The Tribunal had awarded compensation of Rs.5,30,000/- under conventional heads, which is on the higher side. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd VS Pranay Sethi reported in (2017 ACJ 2700), the claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.70,000/- only on conventional heads as against Rs.5,30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further, the claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards litigation expenses. Thus, in all, the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.17,70,000/- as against Rs.29,87,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. :8:
10. In the light of the above, we pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal filed by the insurer is allowed in part.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 02.02.2015, passed by the III-Additional District and Sessions Judge and Member IV-
Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi in MVC No.2115 of 2013 is modified by reducing the compensation from Rs.29,87,000/- to Rs.17,70,000/-, which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization.
(iii) The order of apportionment and deposit ordered by the Tribunal holds good. Statutory deposit, if any, to be transferred to the concerned Tribunal.
(iv) Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE
Vnp*