Karnataka High Court
Kum Shridevi Danappa Danappagol vs Husainsab Nabisab Nadaf on 29 September, 2011
Author: B.V.Nagarathna
Bench: B.V.Nagarathna
H
0 000 2
Ø4 H
0 0
" 0 0
H
0
J; (_ 0 000 w 0
I (Il 0 00002
Cu
C H
•- t) 0
0 )
4
t
0
Go 00000 2
0 0
Qt 0 L 2 C
0'i
pt3
rI 0
0 (r
H
H
tz
4 __
0 00000 Cu C
0 0 00000 Cl' C
0
01
0
c)O 00000 0 z
0
0 cnolcna'(fl
iD 0
w 2
0 00000 H
0 00000 C
z
2
TH NATIONAL INSURANCE CO
LTD
BY ITS SR DIViSIONAL MANAGER
MARUTHI (2 \1 LI. BEt (i.iUM
RESPONDENTS
(Bx Sri J \GADISFT P \TIL DV 1OR
RI 3 R2)
PillS MPA 15 PILED U/S 173(1) oF
MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD I)ATED
: I 7/0 /2008 PASSED
IN MVC NO3305i'2005 ON THE FIL
E OF THE ADDL.CIVIL
JUDGE (SR.DN) & MACT. GOKAK,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPEN
SATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATIO
N.
IN_MFANo.2O76L2OO8:
BETWEEN:
SMT RENUKA W, C) IRAPPA JANDERU
RUBAR
Age. 21 YEARS. 0CC NIL
R/O MUDALGI TQ GOKAK
DIST BELGAUM
APPELLANT
(By Sri, SANTOSII S HA'LPIKATAG1 ADY
AND:
I HUSAINSAB NABISAB N '\DAF
AGE \1AJOR 0CC 1
)RIVER OF LXURY
P '0 NAGANUR
IQ GUKNJ\
RfVLR )F F X f I MP
3ERNU K\2
RN\IE'H I3SAPP
AGE \IA.JoP 0 LI
P ( HAiLUP
U K\i
'NRR () N K: F 'TIKi
\PINC c. 3.
-3-
3 THE NATIONAL INSURANCE Co LTD
BY ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER
MARUTHI GkLLI I3ELGAUM
-. RESPONDENTS
(B' Sri JAGADISH PTIL -WV FOR RI & R2)
TI-IlS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: I 7/OQ/2008 PASSED J ,
IN MVC NO3333/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.CIVIL "
JUDGE (SR.DN) & MACT. GOKAK, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAiM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA No.2075812008:
BETWEEN:
SMT LAGAMAWWA Wi 0 HAL PPA AlGAL
Age.41 YEARS,
0CC NIL, R/O ARJIJNWADI. TQ GOKAK
D1ST- BELGAUM.
APPFLI ANI
(B' Sri. SANTOSH S HAflIKATAGI ADV.)
AND:
HI. SAINSAB NABISAB NADAf
AGF MAJOR. 0CC DRP ER OF' LI. XI I?
4
R '0 NAGANUR. TQ GOKAK
: RWTES1-T BS\PP SNTI
\GE MAJOR. 0CC OWNER )F L' \t R\
K OHA
L R Q r(T(AK
4
'11fF AK) All t ZX G( ) TI
'3 I q SR DT.STflN&L T.j
\1;kUr'-lIt-:' 'I 9F
;'' 'I
t
Pr"' ),i•'i T,
U iI H 'TIl i P, K RI
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(l) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17/09 / 2008 PASSED
TN MVC N0330S/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL CIVIL
JUDGE (SR.DN) MACT. GOKAK. PARTL\ ALLOWING THE
CLAiM PETITION FOR COMPENSATiON 'kM) SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT oF COMPENSATION
INMFANo.20762j 2008:
BETWEEN:
SIDDAPPA KENCHAPPA BABALI
AGE:23 YEARS
0CC NIL, R/O NAGANUR. TQ GOKAK
DIST: BELGAUM
APPELLANT
(By Sri. SANTOSH S HATI'IKATAGI AD\)
AND:
I HUSAINSAB NABISAB NADAF
AGE MAJOR, 0CC DRIVER OF I UXURY
R/O NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK
Th RAMESH BASAPPA NADAF
AGE MAJOR, 0CC DRiVER OF' LUXL RY
R/O NAGANUR T'Q GOKAK
FHE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LIT'
B'i TTS SR DI\ 1810 NAt \IANAGER
\IAPi TEl c7LLi
c \GAI I H I \IIL D I 07 1 7 P2
I HIS MFA I FiLET) 1:, S 17Th H OF M\ \( 7 G LEST
T IU 'I P(\1ENT \ND A\\ \R ) U \i El) :
I\C () U '20 C)' HE LI F II U
I J I TI / )K )
o U LUll N P C MPP LEt N
MFANo.2O75Q
BETWEEN:
SMT GOURAWWA W/0 GURUP\D PUJERI
AGE. :43 YEARS. CC,: NiL
R/0 KANKANWADI, TQ GOKAK
DIST: BELGAUM.
.APPELLANT
(By Sri, SANTOSH S HATTIKATAGI ADV.)
AND:
1. HUSAINSAB NABISAB NADAF
0CC DRIVER OF LUXURY
R/O NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK
DIST BELGAUM
2. RAMESH BASAPPA SANT1
0CC OWNER OF LUXURY
R/O HALLUR, TQ GOKAK
DIST BELGAUM
3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
SENIOR DIVISONAL MANAGER
MARUTHI GALLI. BELGAUM
DIST BELGAUM
RESPONDENTS
F0RP 2 R2j
THIS MFA IS FILED U
1 S 173(1; OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 1 7/09/2008 PASSED
IN MVC NO.3309/2005 OI. THE F.JLE OF THE ADDL.CIVIL
j%V (SR. DN) N; MACN; GOKAIC PARITY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PET TION
..
FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
E%T43'CVMENT' OF COMPENSATION.
D
14/
INMFANo.2O76Q9&
BETWEEN:
SMT LAKKAWWA W ' 0 DUNDAPPA AlGAL
1
AGE:22 YEARS,
0CC NIL, R/O ARJUNWADI
TQ GOKAK. DIST: BELGAUM.
.APPELLANT
(By Sri, SANTOSH S HATTIKATAGI ADV.)
AND:
I. HUSAINSAB NABISAB NADAF
AGE MAJOR 0CC DRIVER OF LUXURY
R/0 NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK
DRIVER OF LUXURY TEMPO
BEARING NO KA 23/7321
2. RAME.SH BASAPPA SANTI
AGE MAJOR 0CC OWNER OF LUXURY
R/O HALLUR, TQ GOKAK
OWNER OF LUXURY TEMPO
BEARII\G NO KA 23/7321
3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
BY ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER
MARUTHI GALLI BELGAUM
RESPOND PNTS
Bv Sri. JAGAD1SH PATIL ADV. FOR RI C R2)
_
THIS MPA IS FILED L/ S I 73(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:17/09/2008 PASSED
33- 23 CL 1 iF PILL GA HE JAC L
1
JUDGE (SR.DN) d MACT, GOKAX, PARTLY ALLOWING TEE
CL
L
1 .].L PET1TJ ON FOR CO Ni PEN :
AND SE SKI !\4 C
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
p2QL2QQ$i
BETWEEN:
RAOSAB RAJASAB GDYAL
AGE4IYERS 0CC NIL
R/0:MUDALGI. TQ.: G0I<AK,
DIST: BELGAUM.
.APPELLANT
IE3v Sri, SANTOSH S HATTIKATAGI ADV.)
AND:
I. HUSAINSAB NABISAB NADAP
AGE MAJOR. 0CC DRIVER OF LUXURY
R/0 NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK
2. RAMESH BASAPPA SANTI
AGE MAJOR, 0CC OWNER OF LUXURY
R/O HALLUR, TQ GOKAK
3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
BY ITS SR DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
MARUTHI GALLI, BELGAUM
RESPONDENTS
iBy Sri. JAGADISH PATIL ADV. FOR RI & R2)
-
- r -
TH.1S MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT ?GA1NST
THE JUDOMEMI AND AWARD D\TED I7/u92O&8 PASSE
D
iN iviVC Nu333 I. / 2uOb Oj Tht F.iL 0t TEii ADDL.UIViL
(41
JUDGE (SRDN) & MACT. (lORAN, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE
CLA TM PETITION FOR CO MPENSATTON AND
SEEIK.ING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
BETWEEN:
RUM JASHRI SHANIKAR MALANGI
AGE 10 YEARS. 0CC STUDENT, R
'C) NAGAUR
1
TQ GOKAK, DIST BELGAUM
MINOR R/BY M/G SHANKAR KALLAPPA MALANG1
DIST: BELGAUM.
APPELLANT
(By Sri, SANTOSH S HATTIKATAGI ADV.)
AND:
1. HUSAINSAB NABISAB NADAF
0CC DRIVER OF LUXURY
R/O NAGANUR. TQ GOKAK
DIST BELGAUM
2. RAMESH BASAPPA SANTI
0CC OWNER OF LUXURY
R,/O HALLUR. TQ GOKAK
DIST BELGAUM
3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER
MARUTHT GALLI. DIST BELGAUM
RESPONDENTS
(By Sri, JAQADI SH PATIL ADV, FOR RI & R2)
IS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT A,ND AWARD DATED: 17709/2.008
PASSED
IN MVC NO.3301 / 2005 ON THE y
1
Q THE ADDL. CIVIL
JUDGE SR.DN) K MACT GOKAK, PARTLY ALL
OWING THE
CLAIM PET1TI.ON pQR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING
jJJJ }. 2KG
13. 3 EJYT (3)13. CO Ni P13K. SATION,
-- C) --
I! )IF&?Js±2Q75P1 ZQQ$i
BETWEEN:
RkMAZAN ROASAB GADYkL
AGE: 12 YEARS. 0CC STUDENTS
MINOR REP.BY M/O ROASAB RAJASAB GADIAI
AGE: 38 YEARS, 0CC: NIL,
RIO MUDALAGI TQ GOKAK,
DIST: BELGAUM.
.APPELLANT
(By Sri. SANTOSH S HATPIKATAGI ADV.)
AND:
HUSSAINSAT3 NAHISAB NADAF
AGE: MAJOR. 0CC DRIVER OF LUXURY TEMPO
R/O NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK
DTST BELGAUM
RAMESH BASAPPA SANTI
0CC OWNER OF LUXURY TEMPO
R/O HALLUR, TQ GOKAK
DIST BELGAUM
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
BY ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAl MANAGER
M%RUTI{I (T
kL I. )TSt HF thAt M
1
RF.SWY\DENTS
3 3 A(ADFIPPA F3R 'rZ
SRI B t ..4.EfHRAM RA' -un FOR R;j
Ilk, flA F flIED t S 1.3(1, ()f ' .K1 AGkIN
1 S
H "MI' 'TAll) UARI I YrI 1 ) ' 8 ' it ' '
MV" Nfl .3o,2'fl (fl iRE "ILE 'F :HE 4DnL C P II
OCr 'sR ..) 1 ifl I C )Is,AK P.A1cT.. M .C. P U
5
%LL
L \ FlT( S(J' 1
()
\ A " ( I C
1' ' b ' •
' •: ' •'T. i
10
IN MFA No.2129712008:
BETWEEN:
SHRI RAMESII 5/0 B'\SAPPA SANTI
AGE MAJOR. 0CC OWNER OF LUXURY
R/O HALLLR, IQ GOKAK
DIST: BELGAUM
\PPFI LL\NT
(By Sri, SANTOSH S HATTIKAI'AGI !\D\
AND:
KUMARI SRIDFVI D/O DANAPPA DANAPPAGOL
AGE 6 YRS, 0CC STUDENT,
SINCE MINOR REP BY HIS MINO
GUARDIAN DANAPPA DANAPPAGOL,
R/O NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK
HUSSAINSAB NABISAB NADAF
AGE' MAJOR, 0CC DRIVER OF I X R' I FMPO
BEARING NO KAL3/7321
R/O i{AILTR I'Q GOKAK
IHF N\IR)N\L1NSURANCF (C) ID
BY 115 SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGF R
MRUIIIIGMI I)IS1 BFIGA1M
11IIS MF \ S I FD I S 1 01 M C C
1)( MI I ND \W \RD ) TF ) 9 0 U
C) ' 00 Xliii )
11
IN MFA No.2075212008:
BETWEEN:
MALIAPPL\ B'YLAPPA HAl IGOUDAR
ge 24 t EARS.
0CC NIL. R C) NAG ANUR. TQ GOKAK
DIST BELGAUM
.APPELLAN1
(B\ Sri, SANTOSH S HATT1KATAGI ARVI
AND:
HUSAINSAB NABISAB NADAF
AGE MAJOR. 0CC DRIVER OF LUXURY
R/O NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK
2. RAMSH BASAPPA SANTI
AGE MAJOR. ()C OWNER OF LUXURY
R/O HALLUR, TQ GOKAK
. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
BY ITS SR DIVISIONAL MANAGER
MARUTIII 0 M LI BELGAUM
RLSPOND Ni S
(B\ Sri .JAGADISH PATIL ADV FOR RI R2j
THIS IFA IS FILED 'S 173( ) OF MY WI AGMNS
FUF JUDGMENI AND AWARD DALED 1 09 2008 P\SSF
N M\ C NO.3302 20
D (iN THE PILE OP FHE ADDL,Ci\ IL
0
JUDU SR DN 0 \I2CT GOKAIx, PARTL' AL LOWING THE
J I PE'I 1110' FOR OMPFN Yl 1( N D 5I I T NO
N I\N M NI COMILNS II(N
IN MFA No20753j2O08:
BEtWEEN:
Ij
12
0CC NIL, R/O MUDALGI, TQ GOKAK
DIST: BELGAUM.
APPELLANT
(By Sri. SANTOSH S HAflKATAG1 ADV)
AND:
I HUSAINSAB NABISAB NADAF
AGE MAJOR, 0CC DRIVER OF LUXURY
R/O NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK
2. RAMESH BASAPA SANTI
AGE MAJOR, 0CC OWNER OF LUXURY
R/0 HALLUR, TQ GOKAK
3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER
MARUTHI GALLI, BELGAUM
RESPONDENTS
(By Sri JAGADISH PATIL ADV. FOR RI & R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17/09/2008 PASSED
IN MVC NO 3303/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL CIVIl
JUDGE (SR.DN) & MACT GOKAK, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION
IN MFA No.2O754J2Q$:
8BTWN:
,MT (HAM)RAWWA Al JO LPIA K NI ANT
3$ YEARS
OC C II R 0 N 'GAN P QC KAK
31 1 BI C
r
A A
13
AND:
1. HUSAINSAB NABISAB NADAF
AGE MAJOR. 0CC DRIVER OP LUXURY
R/O NAGANUR. TQ GOKAK
RAMESH BASAPPA SANT1
AGE MAJOR, OC OWNER OF LUXURY
R/O HALLUR, TQ GOKAK
3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE Co LTD
BY ITS SR DIVISIONAL MANAGER
MARUTHI GALLI, BELGAUM
RESPONDENTS
,(Bv Sri. JAGADISH PATIL ADV. FOR Ri & R2)
0 Lc 03 *
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:17/09/2008 PASSED
IN MVC NO3304/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE DDL CIVIL
JUDGE (SR.DN) & MACT, GOKAK, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
INo.77fOO8:
BETWEEN:
SMT TAYA\VWA XV! 0 SATTEPPA MUNYAL
Age:53 YEARS.
f-
'LC \IL, Ri U ILL LXXi, iJ iULAi.
Fr\r.'" r--' -
01ST: BELGAUM.
By Sri. SANTOS H S HATTJ KATAGi1 ADO.
AND:
PLO 5011% SOB N \BJSAB NA DOS
AG E 1VAJ 0 R, 0CC D RIVER 0 P LUXURY
5/0 NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK
14
2. RAMESH BASAPPA SANTI
AGE MAJOR, 0CC OWNER OF LUXURY
R'O HALLUR. TQ GOKAK
3 THF NATIONM INSURANCE CO LID
Bi II'S SR DI\ISIONAL MANAGER
MARUTHI GALLI. BELG'UM
.RESPODENU
Sri, JAGADISH PATIL ADV. FOR Ri & R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:17/09/2008 PASSED
IN MVC N03307/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.CIVIL
JUDGE (SR.DN) & MACT, GOKAK, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA No.20756] 2008:
BETWEEN:
KUM MAYAWWA NAGESH JANDEKURUBAR
AGE 07 YEARS,
SINCE MINOR R/B M/G NAGFSH RAMA
JNDEKURUBAR, AGE MAJOR,
0CC AGRICULTURE, R 0 MI' DALGI IQ G0ICK
1)IS'I BELGAUM
\PPFIIANI
I3 Sr S kN I'OSH S HAl TIV T CxI AD\
AND
V13 I'BJ 'i U I
GI M \ OR 0 C I)RI' FR P I
I ( \( I'I U OF
I\1I' I I
F C V
( k I YE
15
3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
BY ITS SR DIVISIONAL MANAGER
MRL'THI GALL!. BELCALM
RESPONDENTS
IB'. Sri. JAGADISII PATIL ADV. FOR RI T. R2)
5
THIS MFA IS FILED Ui'S 173(1> OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED.17/0/2008 PASSED
IN MVC NO.330b/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.CIV1L
JUDGE (SR.DN) & MACT, GOKAK. PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION
IN MFA No.20760/2008:
BETWEEN:
KUM ANNAPLfRNA JOTEPPA KONK \NI
GE 10 YEARS 0CC,: STUDENT,
SINCE MINOR, 0CC DRIVER OF LUXUR\
R/O NAGANUR. TQ GOKAK
DIST' BELGAUM.
APPELLANT
(By Sri SANTOSH S HATT'IKATAGI ADV)
AND:
I HUSAINSAB NABLAB NDAF
(xF MAJOR 0CC OWNE P Of UN RY
? 0 F M LUR. FQ ( (KAR
'AMF SIT T3ASAPPA S'\\T
k( F MAJOR. 0CC OWNFL F I
P OH LLF P. TQ GOIK'\k
FIlE \A'I IO\ \I NSL RAN( L CE i U
i3 is sR U!.\. Si( \AL \IAN
M 'SR' 11-IT ALL J3ELC V
',' 'r' TT
A
it lcjt. .. AiI-J-a ..a
-16-
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:17/09/2008 PASSED
IN MVC NO.3310/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.C1VIL
JUDGE (SR.DN) & MACT, GOKAK, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA No.2129612008:
BETWEEN:
SHRI RAMESH Sb BASAPPA SANTI
AGE MAJOR, 0CC OWNER OF LUXURY TEMPO
RIO HALLUR, TQ GOKAK
DIST: BELGAUM.
.APPELLANT
(By Sri. SANTOSH S HATFIKATAGI ADV.)
SliD:
KUMARI JAYASHREE D/O SHANKAR MALANGI
AGE 7 YRS, 0CC STUDENT,
SINCE MINOR REP BY HIS
MINOR GUARDIAN SHANKAR MALANGI
R/O NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK
RESPONDENTS
(By Sri. JAGADISH PATIL ADV. FOR Ri & R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:17/09/2008 PASSED
IN MVC NO.3301/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.CIVIL
JUDGE (SR.DN) & MACF, GOKAK, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.32,000/- WITH THE INTEREST AT
THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
THE DATE OF REALISATION.
".4
£
-- --
(IllS M1 ' IS ViLFL) L S I £J(1) OF \IV \CT •\G\I\$1 rilE
JI. IK•MI' I \\l) ' RD D\TED:1 09 2008 PSSEI) IN \1VC ,
NO ! U )fl( O\ HF 1:11 14 OF filE %DDL ('P. IL JUDGE
' . 4 WR DN)
is MA 1, xOK\K \RIL\ LLO%ING filE CL MM F'KTIIIO\ fOR
('OMPI' \t Tl() ' \I) SEEKING E'\H \Nc bMl \ 1 01
('OMI'i' \s U I0\•
IN Ms A No.2nz96/2008:
BETh EEIt
'IR R1JSi 13\SPP\sA\ri
U R OC C OWNER Of' U XL R\ 1 vEPO
• U I . LI R EQ GOKAK
.)I'- 1 !1 A G'iI \'
F'Pf'1LNf
(13' S. ' .J.'J !SH P kD 'I
AND:
.J I'RI*. D 0 SHA\K\R MAIANC
' 1
3
)C C STUDE? r. SI"a( r MINOR PEP Ifl
RS
I'.. '.• 1 c S1IA\K'\R h'.i L'iPPA I-LAM
:t 'Rh !
2
1< •) tG\.:R, FQGuKK
--. . c . ,RIS\RN.I.i'tI
• (j ç I)['J j l Of I I"x 1 IT\)
1
R ' L'
14
•:'
,
: AISU . (H'i?.
1
L\l
• •1 •. I •'tL'--i! 1
.
'F', ,'
£ ! '.
1
L :'JI" I?'
- tj..I (H? I-' LA ''sI r \;' ' "
i) I L
Ill I , 'Ij :1
• -- i--l.a C ' .''--.• . at 'I
1' '
1.1 :•_
I'
'
IN MFA No2 129912008:
BETWEEN:
SHRI RAMESH S/() BASAPPA SANI'I
AGE MAJOR, 0CC OWNER OF LUXURY TEMPO
BEARING NOJcA 23/7321
R/O HALLUR, EQ GOKAK
APPELLANT
(B Sri SANTOSH S HATTIKATAGUiADV)
AND:
1. SIDDAPPA KENCHAPPA BABALI
AGE: 29 YRS.. 0CC: AGRIL,
R/O NAGANUR, TQ GOKAK,
HUSAINASAB NABISAB NADAF
AGE MAJOR, 0CC DRIVER OF LUXURY TEMPO
BEARING NO. KA23/7321,
R/O. HALLUR, TQ. GOKAK
3 THE NTI0NAL INSRUNCE CO. LED
BY 115 SENIOR DIVISIOKAI MANAGER
MRUTI GALLI, BELGAUM
RFSPONDI NI
(B Sn JAGADISH PATIL AD FOR Ri & R2)
T
THIS MP IS I ILED U ' 1 3(lj OF M (
H P )GMF I \NI) WKL DILD 9 0 S I S U
I' C C JO (N lip II )F Ill L) )L
1)CI (SR OI 'V
OMPE S I EKI I
I I
- 1$ -
INMFANo.2jQP:
BETWEEN:
SHRI RAMESH S/C) BASAPPA SANTI
AGE MAiOR. 0CC OWNER OF LUXURY
TEMPO BEARING NOJKA-23/732 1
R/0 HALLUR, TQ GOKAK,
DIST: BELGAUM.
JRc jjJrL APPELLANT
(B Sii TORHSHAiTIKATA(PADV)
AND:
I. KUMARI MAYAW\VA D/O NAGESH JAN DEKURUBAR
AGE 4 YRS, 0CC STUDENT,
SINCE MINOR REP BY HIS MINOR
GUARDIAN NAGESH JANDEKURUBAR
R/0 MUDALAGI TQ GOKAK,
2. HUSAINASAB NABISAB NADAF
MAJOR. DRIVER OF LUXURY TEMPO
BEARING NC). KA-23/7321,
R/O. HALLUR, TQ. GOKAK.
3. THE NATIONAL INSURPNCE CO. LTD.,
BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
MARUTI GALLI, BELGAUM.
RENPCi'DEJfS
/3
7 H. <7
IbIS iFA is FILiD L/ i i3(ij OF MY CT A1Ai
THE JUDGMENT AND WARD DATED 17, 09/2008 PASSED
IN MVC NO.3306/2.005 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDL.CIV1L
JUDGE (SR DX) & MACT, GOKAK AWARDING
CO1PENSAT ON OF P3 32 000 WITH IE INTEREST AT
A r< Q PEThTIu
'HF 9\T U PC)M 7 *
U ) _.-'
S
- 19 -
IN MFA No.2206512009:
BETWEEN:
SMT.SUNITA, W/O.SADASHIVA UPALANI
Age: 38 YEARS,
R/O MUDALAGI CROSS, GOKAK TALUK
BELGAUM DIST.
%amt&s-Cfl ...APPELLANT
(By SriWANTOSH S HAflIKA!j)ADV.)
AND:
1. HUSAIN SAB NABISAB NADAF
MAJOR, OCC:DRIVER, LUXURY TEMPO
NO.KA-23/7321 R/O NAGANUR, GOKAK
TALUK, BELGAUM DIST.
2. RAMESH BASAPPA SANTI,
AGE MAJOR, OWNER LUXU RY LORRY NO.KA-23/
732 1, R/O HULLUR, GOKAK TALUKA,
BELGAUM DIST.
3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS
SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER
MARUTI GALLI, BELGAUM CITY
DIST. BEGLAUM.
'TAO.Rv tsp Pfrn f2ftft.t RESPONDENTS
...
(R1-HUSAJN SAB N NADAF-S) --
4SR.' .&.1c. SOQVAG.frlt, t4t. ofLl2? eJ.n.tbrw
THIS MFA FILED U/Sec. 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, SI: Iktthl
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17-09-2008
PASSED IN MVC.NO.3383/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE
ADDL.CWIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND MEMBER MACI, GOKAK,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
0
H! CD
J t CD C Q
j2 CD CI,
1 0 -
0 C N) r+ ( CD
CD --
D SO C Q
I C
--J
C C
CD
I
CD
H
I
I H fTh
r
CD -
CD CD CD
c) --t CD CD
CD p 1 (j r c
I CO CD C CO
CD -J) CD
N - c
r
C 2
CD CD I CD (DC
I N) CO
cC I CD C -" C N)
Co c-i
CD C Cl
C -J
CO CD
-: r-* CD
Cl C I C) CD (J1
r+ CD
CD N) I
I Jo -
C I CD C CD
cIQ Cl, I -
CD CD -
o CD CD CD CD
I CD C
DTQ I - j
I C ) CD
Cl C( I
1 -+
CD
C) 0 C + JO
--
1 I C) CD CD
-- 0
-J I
--
CD --
0 CD rn
(Jo
-J
r
CD CD I I I CD
CO 0 C/) CD
CO C CO
CD Cl, :O
CO
1 e
CD
c:
CD rt c) - C
r -
C I r-t
t I--t -
C
p I CD CD CD
e
- 21 -
had suffered permanent disability, they filed their respective
claim petitions seeking compensation on various heads.
4. After service of notice from the Tribunal the
respondent Nos. 1 and 2 appeared through a common counsel
and filed similar statement of objections. Respondent No.3-
Insurance Company also appeared and filed statement of
objections and the respondents denied the averments of the
claim petitions and sought dismissal of the same. In addition
the Insurance Company also contended that if at all, the
liability was restricted to satisfy the judgment and awards
only in 12 cases, since the seating capacity of the vehicle was
12, but there were 16 persons travelling, which is contrary to
the terms and conditions of the policy. In the circumstances,
they sought restriction of their liability to only 12 cases.
5. On the basis of the rival pleadings, the Tribunal
framed the following coMmon issues in all the case.
1. Whether the petitioner proves that the alleged
accident has taken place due to rash and
negligent driving of offended vehicle by its driver
and that due to the impact he sustained personal
injuries? 4,7.
2 Whether the respondents prove that they are not
liable to pay any compensation for the reasons as
alleged in their objections
9
3 Whether the petitioner s entitled for
compensation? If so. for how much and from
whom?
4. What order or award?
6. In support of their case, the respondent claimant let
in evidence of 17 persons including that of two Doctors and
produced 254 documents, hich are marked as E'cs p i to P
254 The respondents did not letin any eidence, On the
basis of the evidence on reord the Tribunal awarded
compensation to each of the claimants with interest at the
rate of 60
o pa from thc date of claim petition till rcahzttion
a ing rca i d to tic 1 itun I n ric s irid i d i a c
( (onrin t 511 f
ii
rae a h
CD C CD pa \ -- SD
pa pa CD
r \J CD
- d
CD CD CD C
CD
B C ci.
CD JQ
a, o 0 -
C SD CD o SD
SD C
CD fri fr H CD SD k) CD
a CD r+ SD CD CD
CD CD CD
CD C C
pa SD •t) C
* -- CD CD C
L CD C) CD •0 Q r
I CD C CD
D ci pa CD
pa CR C CD f\a pa
a CD
a CD ci C
CD -- SD C c
C CD J
pa 0
CD j CD
o CD
CD
SD -4 C
IL pa SD CR
CD CD
C CD CD CD CD
fr- C
pa
CD pa C
1 CD CD C
CD o j
-4 C CD
CD
CD C CR CD L) SD
I C C
CD Ii c1Q C CD
CD CD CD
C
I CD o
I fr5 SD CD
CD
.4
CD (11 r
SD --
SD I hCDS 0
C C CD
* i C
SD CD L)
CD CD ci SD
CD CD
IL CD
C, C C
pa
I C SD
frg
J CD
SD C
CD o SD CD
I CD pa
o
I ci CD pa
IL SD CD 1) Z
C C
7Q C
24
permanent disability between 20' to 25°o. having regard to
the nature of injuries sustained. Ho et er the Tribunal has
failed to nard any compensation on thc head of loss of
amenities and also on the head of loss of future income He
therefore, submitted that the compensation on these heads
haie to be awarded.
10 Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance
Company has stated that in the appeals filed by the minor
children no compensation can be awarded on the head of loss
of future earning capacity. He has also stated that the
injuries gould not 1mph that there gould be 20° disabihtui to
the limb He therefore, supported the judgment and ards of
he Inbunal and or t ndtd that the said judgme it a
savLaid ould no 'al &r a in rferen e In h e an
en s t te j i
ftl 'in n i th detais Ii
in ld Tht r lo
MFANo MW No Nature of
20751/08 3301/05 1. Closed Fracture of Shaft 20% to all
of Left Humerus. the injuries
2,Closed fracture of right
forearm
20755/08 3305/05 1 Fracture of right clavicle 25% to all
and contusion on chest, the injuries
20756/08 3306/05 1. Fracture of shaft of left 20% to all
femur at upper third and the injuries.
contusion on chest.
20760/08 3310/05 1 Fracture of superior and 25% to all
inferior rami of pubis on the injuries
both sides
2. Contusion on back.
11. Having regard to the fracture injuries sustained by
the minor claimants and the percentage of disability assessed
b the Doctor to the particular limb and also having regard to
the fact that no compensation can be a arded on the head 1
loss of future earning capacity, in nix con sldered \ lex\.
compensation [ias to be axvarciecl n the bead of disability.
since t has bccn estabished b\ each of th cialmants tridt
tf c, suta1nc(I frau r njunes. lhcr ft i sun
0 ) a a d I he I a \1
I a n a c C r pen c t ad
tu S \ SC ) 000 a c oa tin
I t,
-
-''
,*'i' C..
2 3) 3 C) 32 r+ (3
cc 0 ( C CD 3)
1 cc -3 CD P
cc) -- (3
3 0 CD C) CD
t CD cc
(12 P r (12
3 A) j
CD CD r 1 rt
c) 1 L'3 CD CD CD
0 CD
3 -4 rt CD
C' o r cc
3 3) 0
3 N o0
CD $) cc fr
j C rq
Q
CD
)2
0
C -3 CD CD
N C) C' J2
C 0 (3 Q
ci ) D i )
C) CrI
(1) CD
cc CD
CD 0 o C
-4 -3 (1,) P 0 ::I CD
c a' cn e 02
3:. --
CD
0 C CD
1) C
o a C) i cc
3 CD -4 CD CD ) r
cc - 0 32
- 0 C
CD 02
-3 • o C
CD Is) ) r
o 0
-3 0 N CD
i (1) CD
- CD CD
-3 cc) cc
32 ci2 CD
I cc CD C) 0
cc L. P Is) CD CD
(1 cc !CD
frJ q cc o 0 C c C
-3 CD
0 fri CD
(2
r
3 P • P CD C
ci C 32
0 L'd
3 o -- C 3
C' cc)
3 01 -4
(Il -
3 P 0 •'3 -- - C
-3 > -- i CD 2
- 27
diet He therefore. submits that the compensation on the
heads and o er all compensation ma3 be enhanced.
14. Per contra. the counsel for the Insurance ("ornpanv
has supported the judgment and award of the Tribunal and
has stated that there could be no enhancement in all these
cases. He therefore submitted that these appeals have to be
dismissed.
15. The details of the injuries sustained by the
appellants-claimants and also the percentage of disability
assessed by the Doctors are noted as follo'c s
Percentage
MFA No. MVC No. Nature of injuries of
dlsablly
20752108 3302/05 1 Chip Fracture of laterai 20% to all
conyle of tibia the injunes
2 Swelling in left knee ar d
ankle
20753/08 3303/05 1 Fracture of greater 20% to all
luberosity of left humeru the injuries
• & contusion eft side of
chest
2(i'54/08 3304105 1 Fractuie of supenur & 25% to all
inferior ram Fubis on both the 'njui ies
sides and contusion or
chest
2O7. t'i) •c5 I Clo'ed t rr?•: p "tieft )fl to ar
'tac oone tha •ruuricc
2 C iosed a -e 4 f "gfr
28
20758/08 1 3308/05 1. Closed fracture of left 30% to all
ulna. the injuries
2. Fracture of 7th
rib of
right side
20759/08 1 3309/05 1. Fracture of superior and 35% to all
inferior rami of pubis on the injuries
both sides.
2. Fracture of 4 rib of
tight side,
.
20761/08 3331/05 11 Fracture of superior 30% to all
ramus of right pubis the injuries
2. Transverse Fracture of
rJ,htpubic bone.
20762/08 3332/05 1, Fracture of 4 20% to all
metatarsal bone and the injuries.
contusion on left !g.
20763/08 j 3333/05 1. Fracture of inferior 20% to all
r
20764/08 4 jramous of left pubis.
3334/05 1. Closed fracture of shaft
the injuries
50% to all
of left femur, the injuries
2 Closed fracture of right
fore arm bone
16 From the above, it is noted that each of the
appellants has sustained fracture injuries, percentagt f
disability to the particular limb tins als been assessed /3
of th di abillt3 to the part c ila hint a o be ssessed
hole hod isabilit. Sr e e ppell ints c a mant
ei e orkinp as agri ult ira oolies c mpen at on r he
0 dl
n
29
absence of there being am- other evidence Having regard to
the percentage of whole-body disabilit), compensation
on the
head of loss of friture e zrninq capacity I as to he iwarde
I in
cach 01 the cases Also loss of earning during laid up perIod
for a pet iod of three months has to be awarded where there
are grievous fractures. Since, the appellants have susta
ined
fracture mjunes, the compensation on the head of lass
of
amenities would have also awarded. Further, I find that
on
the head of nourishment charges only, compensation has been
awarded and not on other incidental charges
17 Having regard to the aboic' facts. the compensation
on the head of loss of amenities is assessed at flO.000/
and
compensatio toard incidental charge is msesse I t
Z5.000 The mpensation is r assessed s f lloi s
REG. MFA 2Ofl2j2®
113 1
ti'
' c 4
rw,n ntPl r' 1 ttc it
f a i n q op c c i 1 r Z40 3 0, 1 i tnt, .es. ci
•
. 'hole :td. Lsah"itt ai.' ?,
4t''
1 • 1 r •
1 irn .' .•t ; •O VVI.• ; F' .Ij r' ;
3 pr 1
. ,_,.t, )! ,
(
30
[t.ooo x r. X 16 X 12J. Thus the re assessment of
compensation is a fo11oi s:
(I) Pain & suffering: 3O.000!
Ui) Medical expenses 5.0O0;-
(iii) Loss of income during laid up 9.0O0I-
period
(iv) Loss of amenities t30.000!-
(v) Incidental charges 5,O00I-
(vi) Loss of future earning capacity T40.3201-
[t3,000/-X7%'C16X12t --
TOTAL: fl19,3201-
REQ. 13A39753i32QS:
19 The compensation on the bead of loss of fhtnre
earning capncity ou1d be Z22,680/ having regard to V.
"hole both disabthtv and 3.000/- being the monthhT
income
2nd by appl)ing the ippropriate multiphe of '9' [fl
)CO X
X' X 121 his h e c&C snen of coinpealsat on is -.s
'oll-p's
'a &sufferng e0O0C
Mcon xp. se ? .5)0-
Olin .,a,wlai,,je
s cf :tri'e% S') t)j.
31 -
(v) Incidental charges ?5.000I
(vi) Loss of future earning capacity t22.6801-
flOOt) Y"cX'Y 121
TOTAL ?1,04,1801-
REG. MFA.2O754I2OQç:-
20. The doctor has opined that there is 23'
n disabiliti
to the particular portion of the body. Therefo
re, whole-body
disability can be assessed at 8%, the notional
monthly income
is assessed at T3.000/- and by applying appropriate
multiplier of '16'. the compensation on the
head of loss of
future earnznq capacity is assessed at ?46,080/-
1t3.000; X 8'..
X 16 X 12J Thus. tht re-assessment of com
pensation is as
follows
(ii Pain & suffenng. fl5.000I
I") Medical expenses' 12,OOOI-
1','; Loss ot income du irg laid u %9
Derod
'iv Lossofarnenties ?3iOtCi
.' lrcd2ntal acje
t5 000
v in c ftturc c-anne czact '4 801
7
TOTAL' U 37080
0
32
REG. MPA.20757j2008:
21 20' o disabilit's has been assessed as the disability
to the p irticulat portion of the both. Therefore hole body
disability is assessed at 7°. raking notional monthly income
at fl,000/ and by applying appropriate multiplier of 11' the
compensation on the head of loss offutw-e earning capacity is
assessed at ?27,720/ [I"3,000/- X 7"o X 11 K 121 Thus, the re
assessment of compensation is as follows:
(i) Pain & suffenng '3O,O00I
(ii) Medical expenses' Z5 000!
(iii) Loss & income dunng laid up Z9.000I-
penod
(iv) Loss of amenities 30 000I
(v) Incidental charges• 5 000/-
(vii Loss of future earning capacity Z27,720i-
flOut,?,' X7'X11A12j
TOTAL, ?106 120!-
RIG.MF&2015812®8
2 .i i't the dew tcr nas .issessc a U, .. d,sa.alit' t.,
t 1. .1 ii ru' t e Al ci c. disabil aa.cssa.a -t :
ijs,h rpclni s.
p1 ) CL t h
I
33
compensation on the head of loss of fiAture earning capacity is
assessed at 34,000 3.OuO A lU X 15 12j Thus, the re
rssrsment of cmpensation is as follun s
(i) Pain & suffering 35OOO/
(ii) Medical expenses: 15OOO/-
(iii) Loss of income during aid up 9,OOO/
period
(iv) Loss of amenities. 3O OOQ/
(v) Incidental charges 5,OOOi
(vi) Loss of future earning capacity 54OOO/
/3OOO/ X 1O°o X 15 X 121.
TOTAL: 1,48,OOOI
REG. MFQ59 2008
23 since the doctor has assessed 3a°o disability to th
fractured portion, the wholeboda disability can be assessed
at i2' The notional monthi\ income 01 the appellant is
assnssd at ?C000/ nd by app'rg trprnpr1at Tnuliipi--
I 1
a at a on tn h a af ía , F e a
'a
1
acztz I ass s I 64 800' C ) 2 1
Thus a r 'a ssrnn
t con pu a ta (
F' ci q 0 i
: a F
34
(iii) Loss of income during laid up period 9QOO/
(iv) Loss of amenities 3OOOO/-
v) Incidental charges 5 000/
(vi) Loss of future earning capacity 64800!-
/3OOo X i2 X 15X 12/.
TOTAL L63,8OOI
REG._MFA.2O76JQQ:
24 The doctor has assessed disability to the particular
limb at 3O, the whole body disability is assessed at I flo.
The notional monthly income of the appellant is assessed at
3OOO/' and by applying appropriate multiplier of l5 having
regard to the age of the claimant, the compensation on the
head of loss of future earnmq capacity is 'issessed at
54OOO/ 3,OaO X lOX 15X 121. Thus, the re-assessment
of compcns'tion s is follow s
Pain & suffe inq 35 YJCi
M Cc eXPeflS€. 15 CuP!
(w) Loss of ncorne during iaa up porod 000!
(iv L s of arnenitie 30 001
V. r;uerta C arge 35 00
tire a nq api ty u4 C
0 2 01
35
REGMFA.2076 2J 2008
25, Having noted that the claimant has sustained
fracture of 4' metatarsal bone and contusion on left leg I find
that the assessment of disabi1it to the particular limb beIng
20n made by the doctor is exaggerated and on the higher
side. Having regard to the nature of injuries, no
compensation on the head of loss of future earning capacity
can he granted, although. the appellant is working as an
agricultural coolie Since there is a fracture to the 4"
metatarsal bone and contusion, compensation would have to
be awarded on the head of thsabthty and loss of amenities to
an extent f I5,00u/ and 1u 000 respcetnel II
addition, a sum of 5.000/ is auarcied towards the mcde,'toi
barges tereforc, total ennanec1 compensaton ix -o ciod ri
3 npe 3C ) 0 th ;se
as
•
' an & sua'ennc 3j Q'jc
M:eaa 'scenses
hi os of c dci I up p 00'
36
(v) Loss of amenities : 1OQOOI
(vi) ncidental Charges 5OOOT-
TOTAL: 58000I
26. Having regard to the nature of fracture injuries, the
doctor has assessed 20% disability to the particular portion of
the body and the wholebody disability can be assessed at
7%. The notional monthly income of the appellant is
assessed at 3,000/ and by applying appropriate multiplier
of J8', the compensation on the head of loss offuture eamiag
capacity is assessed at 45.360/ [3,OOO/ X 7% X 18 X 12].
Thus, the reassessment of compensation is as follows:
(i) Pain & sufferings in respect of 3OOOO/-
fracture:
:ii Med ica expenses : 5QQOL
(iii) Loss .f income during laid up %,000/-
period:
(iv) Loss of amenUes 3OOOOi-
(v) ncidentai charg.es: 5OOO/
(vi) Loss of future earning capacitv 453.6O./-
& / 1k
TOTAL: L24,3$OL
-37-
REG. MFA.207641 tOQ:
27 The doctor has assessed disability to the fractured
portion of the ooch as 50".. the whole-body disabilit' can he
assessed at 17 n. If the notional monthly income of tht
appellant is assessed at ?3000/ and appropriate multiplier
of '18' is applied, then the compensation on the head of loss
of future earning capacity is assessed at Z1.lO.160/- It.ooa -
X17°X18XI2I
28. Having regard to the nature of injuries.
compensation on the head of loss of amenities has to he
assessed at 30,00O/ and the compensation on the head of
pain and suffering is rounded of to Z50 000/- Further, since
the appellant was an in patient for a longer penod and would
ave spent or sider able s iins, a sum f Z 15 X )/ -
'i ardel O%c I Pill ilc fJ(S. 15. t 1 mt
•'ft nnrtnatatio.i 'ii this .isc it dS fo!io'a.
Pain and suffenn Z 00' 0
ii Med xpe se '33,000
•1, charoes !15.Otfl
anscofhjtuietarntnq, 1 I'1161'
V I
- 38
(v) Loss of earnings during 9 000!-
laid up period
(vt) Loss of amenWes. 30000i-
TOTAL. 2,47,16OL
REG. MFAQj2QQ9:
29 It is noted that the award of compensation on the
head of pain and suffering has to be re-assessed as also
additional compensation on the head of incidental charges
would have to be granted, apart from the compensation on
the heads of loss of future earning capacity as well as loss
of
amenities. Further since the doctor has assessed the
disability at l8°, taking notional monthly income at 3,O0
0/
and b\ opplying appropriate multiplier of i.6 the
ompensotion on th head of loss of future arning capa itj 1
assessed at 1,03 680/ [3 000 X 1$ X I 12] Thu h
r dS. S I iI 01 ( ii fl511 C fl I S )iI )I S
Pain and suffer no 4. 000.
Medcalexp nses ZiE0 0
incide ta charges 1 000
;i L s ofearnns Ju n 0 0
Ia!d JO D€3 OcI
s. fu jr er
-3Q-
itL'v V 18 '. in .1 l.'l
(vi) Loss of amenities ?30.000I-
TOTAL: Z2,1 8,680!-
REG. MFA Nos.21296-21299/2008: fLzabthty question!
30. The contention of the learned counsel for the
appellant/owner is that the Tribunal was not justified in
restricting the liability of the insurance company onh to 12
cases, even though, there was over loading of the vehicle in
question, however, the Tribunal ought to have folloed the
decision of the Apex Court by directing the insurance
company to deposit the compensation amount in all the cases
and recover from the oci ner of the vehicle in respect of the
four lou est awards. In other uords. the submission is that
the liability of th insurance company on the 12 highest
awards is 'lot ir
1 dispuz ad in r"spett 'S Aher ftnaf caset.
thn insur ante c ompan niust pay thc tomponscttinn bu
satisfying tht- auaidc and 'c,'itd recover 1mm 'h.
appr'l!anz/'in nPr.
1
T if
cI )t t'PI'(ii it (fli
iv. ' 1 r . 'i''.
'i• ' 1
- 40
CdS( of UNITED INDL4 INSURANUE COMPANY LTMJTEI) I s
frZtJ,PUIVAM 4ND OTTJERS reported in 2011 AJ 917.
$2. Per c'ontra. learned counsel for the insurance
company submits that having regard to the fact that the
vehicle in question was overloaded and the premium was paid
only in respect of 12 persons, no liability could have been
fastened on the insurance company in four cases, the
Tribunal rightly fastened the liability on the ovner of thc
vehicle, which portion of the judgment uould not call for an
interference in these appeals
33. He also brought to my notice the order dated
31 08 2009 passed by the Apex Court n the case of
NA TION4L T
II'v
S[IRA NCE COMPANY LRIITED R4 RiA THv'FNI
A
'
1v AvOIJiIR none i CDJ 2009 SC 1754 t ta II i
dn nion t r ret c. macn on t:
c pa t be ic s 1jc n i n cc
i Lar-n Bench -nib e 2r nice 1
ne i. i r i 2011 AC3 917 ' vi
T
-41
34. It is noted that the vehicle in question is a maci cab
which is defined tinder Section 2(22) of the Motor iehicles
act. 1q88 mean 'mu motor rnI'iclt constructed 'r uclapttd to
carry more than sUt passengers, but nor more than
twelve
passengers, excluding the driver, for hire or reu'ard.
A
Maxicab is a "public service vehicle" within the meaning of
Sub-section 35 of Section 2 of the Act publfr service vehicle"
means any motor vehicle used or adapted to be used for the carriage
of passengers for hire or reward, and includes a inaxicab.
a
motorcab. contract carriage, and stage carriage:J
35 It is also noted that as per ExR 1, the cop) of the
policj that premium i as paid m respect of 12 persons
There is statutonr c overage of the risk of passengers tra ellin
g
in a publi senic'e ehicle ander Section 147 of the Act
But.
it is nccessan .; keep iii nard that in :c 'c'i :'s me vt'iiiclt n
'u. stion n n'nceiiied. ; is mat cal'. the Act restig ts he
number 'f passengers in %ucl' a vehtclm to of)) 1'
mass.a'pcrs. 5n e 'here -re u pas't-m en tr elI n in tht
.. 1 i j •I 1 1 niL 11 at ii) ii i i S C t
it (' C it' cff, '1
N
-42-
restricted to only 12 persons. Further. it is necessan to bear
in mmd the latest decision of the Apex Court in the rac of
1VITED LV1)L4 1YSUR..4XCE COiIPAXY I IWITEL) is
K. 41.PUNAM AND OTHERS reported in 2011 ACJ 917 The
facts in the said case are that 15 passengers were trai elling
in a jeep whereas the seating capacity was only 6 Lfiue
passengers besides driven The Apex Court held the liability
of the insurance compan was confined to six persons
covered by the polk That the Apex Court also directed the
insurance compani to pa the amounts in respect of the
awards and to recoer the amount in excess of its habiht3
from the owner in execution of the awards 'ujithout filing an's
separate suit. The said decision cart be squarely applied in
the present case also Under the circumstances, the
respondent/insurance ornpan is direrted to sausft the
a'a' 'is pnsc-ii b'. 'ins Court in tht prest in ,irt as 'ht
iiabilit' i;t tj'm Lphuictrstc corizpaias rn reapt. I ?' tilL ScU't. 1'
flflt •I 4ispite '.
an tnt r,f the tweIe .i'cs wN:c' tLw
,jiqts ti.
1 tNeh'rFctc
.
-43-
36. It is also noted that the reference has been made in
the year 2009 in PAR VA THNENi's case. Till date there has
been no opinion expressed on the said reference. However, in
the judgment reported in 2011 ACJ 917 (KM.PUNAM's Casej
disposed of on 18.02.2011, the Apex Court has directed the
insurance company to pay and recover in a case of
overloading of the vehicle. Therefore, in my view, the decision
reported in 2011 ACJ 917 should be applied in the present
case also. As far as the four other awards are concerned, the
respondent/insurance company is directed to satisfy the said
awards also and recover the same from the appellant/owner
by executing this judgment in accordance with law.
37. In the result, the following order is passed:
ORDER
(I) The appeals filed by the owner of the vehicle are allowed.
(ii) The appeals filed by the claimants are allowed in part.
(iii) The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till realisaiton.
4<2w
-44
(iv) The respondent I insurance company is directed to satisfy the 12 highest awards as per this judgment.
(v) The insurance company is directed to satisfy the award in four other cases also i.e., MFA Nos.2 1296-21299/2008 and recover the said compensation from the owner of the vehide by executing this judgment in accordance with law
(vi) The additional compensation shall be deposited within a period of ten weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment
(vii) Parties to bear their own costs a Vnp*/RKK/