Karnataka High Court
Smt. Sharanamma D/O. Balappa Karadi ... vs M/S Continental Carrier Of India on 1 March, 2023
Author: Ravi V.Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS ON TUESDAY, 1ST DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
HON'BLE JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
MFA NOS.100587 OF 2021 (MV-I)
C/W
MFA NO.100588 OF 2021 (MV-I), MFA NO.100589 OF 2021 (MV-I),
MFA NO.100590 OF 2021 (MV-I), MFA NO.100591 OF 2021 (MV-I),
MFA NO.100592 OF 2021 (MV-I), MFA NO.100593 OF 2021 (MV-D),
MFA NO.100594 OF 2021 (MV-I), MFA NO.100596 OF 2021 (MV-I),
MFA NO.100597 OF 2021 (MV-D),
MFA CROB.NO.100036 OF 2021 (MV-D),
MFA CROB.NO.100037 OF 2021 (MV-I),
MFA CROB.NO.100038 OF 2021 (MV-I),
MFA CROB.NO.100039 OF 2021 (MV-D),
MFA CROB.NO.100040 OF 2021,
MFA CROB.NO.100041 OF 2021 (MV-I),
MFA CROB.NO.100042 OF 2021 (MV-I),
MFA CROB.NO.100043 OF 2021 (MV-I),
MFA CROB.NO.100044 OF 2021 (MV-I) &
Digitally
MFA CROB.NO.100045 OF 2021 (MV-I)
signed by
ANNAPURNA
CHINNAPPA
ANNAPURNA DANDAGAL
CHINNAPPA
DANDAGAL Location:
IN MFA.NO.100587/2021:
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
BETWEEN:
DHARWAD
M/S CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.3,
2ND FLOOR, SANGAM TOWER,
SAVITA VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS PA HOLDER
MR. RAMNIVAS JANGRA,
S/O MAN SINGH, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SHIVAMMA,
W/O VEERABHADRAYYA @
VEERABADRAPPA SUDI,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
2
R/AT KORDAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK,
KOPPAL DISTRICT.
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.251/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL MACT AT
KUSHTAGI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.50,000/- WITH
INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
REALIZATION.
IN MFA.NO.100588/2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.3,
2ND FLOOR, SANGAM TOWER,
SAVITA VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS P A HOLDER,
MR. RAMNIVAS JANGRA,
S/O MAN SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. SHIVALINGAIAH,
S/O. KALAKAYYA,
AGE. 50 YEARS,
R/AT KORDAKEREA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK,
KOPPAL DISTRICT.
3
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.253/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL MACT AT
KUSHTAGI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.3,06,450/- WITH 6
PERCENT INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA.NO.100589/2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.3,
2ND FLOOR, SANGAM TOWER,
SAVITA VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS P A HOLDER,
MR. RAMNIVAS JANGRA,
S/O MAN SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. PARASAPPA,
S/O. BASAPPA @ YALLAPPA MUDHOL,
AGE. 55 YEARS,
R/AT KORDAKEREA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK,
KOPPAL DISTRICT.
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
4
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.254/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL MACT AT
KUSHTAGI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,38,476/- WITH 6
PERCENT P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA.NO.100590/2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.3,
2ND FLOOR, SANGAM TOWER,
SAVITA VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS P A HOLDER,
MR. RAMNIVAS JANGRA,
S/O MAN SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. SHARANAYYA,
S/O HANAMAYYA @ SHANTAYYA GURUVIN,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT KORADAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK,KOPPAL DISTRICT.
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
5
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.255/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL MACT AT
KUSHTAGI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,17,800/- WITH 6
PERCENT INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA.NO.100591/2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.3,
2ND FLOOR, SANGAM TOWER,
SAVITA VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS P A HOLDER,
MR. RAMNIVAS JANGRA,
S/O MAN SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. NAGAMMA,
S/O. HANAMAAGOUDA @
HANAMAYYA MALIPATIL @ GADDAD,
AGE. 60 YEARS,
R/AT KORDAKEREA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK, KOPPAL DISTRICT
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.256/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL MACT AT
6
KUSHTAGI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,38,746/- WITH 6
PERCENT INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA.NO.100592/2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.3,
2ND FLOOR, SANGAM TOWER,
SAVITA VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS P A HOLDER,
MR. RAMNIVAS JANGRA,
S/O MAN SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SHANTAMMA,
W/O. SHIDDALINGAYYA GURIVIN,
AGE. 55 YEARS,
R/AT KORDAKEREA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK, KOPPAL DISTRICT.
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.258/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL MACT AT
KUSHTAGI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,32,200/- WITH 6
PERCENT INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
7
IN MFA.NO.100593/2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.3,
2ND FLOOR, SANGAM TOWER,
SAVITA VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS P A HOLDER,
MR. RAMNIVAS JANGRA,
S/O MAN SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. HANAMAWWA,
W/O HANAMAYYA GURAVI,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
R/AT KORADAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK,
KOPPAL DISTRICT.
2. NINGAMMA,
D/O HANAMAYYA GURAVI,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
R/AT KORADAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK,
KOPPAL DISTRICT.
3. SIDDAYYA,
S/O HANAMAYYA GURAVI,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
R/AT KORADAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK,
KOPPAL DISTRICT.
4. BIMAMMA,
D/O HANAMAYYA GURAVI,
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS,
R/AT KORADAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK,
KOPPAL DISTRICT.
8
5. CHIDANANDA,
W/O HANAMAYYA GURAVI,
AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS,
SINCE MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS
NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER
MT.HANAMAWWA, R/AT KORADAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK, KOPPAL DISTRICT.
6. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R5;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R6)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.250/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL MACT AT
KUSHTAGI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.7,87,000/- WITH 6
PERCENT INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA.NO.100594/2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.3,
2ND FLOOR, SANGAM TOWER,
SAVITA VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS P A HOLDER,
MR. RAMNIVAS JANGRA,
S/O MAN SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. SHARANAYYA,
S/O SANNA HANAMAYYA GURUVIN,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
9
R/AT KORADAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK,
KOPPAL DISTRICT.
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.252/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL MACT AT
KUSHTAGI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,67,400/- WITH 6
PERCENT INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA.NO.100596/2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.3,
2ND FLOOR, SANGAM TOWER,
SAVITA VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS P A HOLDER,
MR. RAMNIVAS JANGRA,
S/O MAN SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SHEKHAMMA,
W/O SHIVAYYA GURIVIN,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
R/AT KORDAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK,
KOPPAL DISTRICT.
10
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.257/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL MACT AT
KUSHTAGI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,25,000/- WITH 6
PERCENT INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA.NO.100597/2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM,
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT PLOT NO.3,
2ND FLOOR, SANGAM TOWER,
SAVITA VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
REPRESENTED BY ITS P A HOLDER,
MR. RAMNIVAS JANGRA,
S/O MAN SINGH,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SHARANAMMA,
D/O BALAPPA KARADI,
W/O HANAMAPPA KARAMUDI,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/AT KORDAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK, KOPPAL DISTRICT.
2. SMT. YALLAWWA,
D/O BALAPPA KARADI,
W/O HANAMAPPA KARAMUDI,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
11
R/AT KORDAKERA,
KUSHTAGI TALUK, KOPPAL DISTRICT.
3. SMT. HONNAMMA,
D/O BALAPPA KARADI,
W/O NINGANAGOWDA GOWDAR,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT PARASPUR
KUSHTAGI TALUK, KOPPAL DISTRICT.
4. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1 to R3;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.259/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL MACT AT
KUSHTAGI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.9,49,000/- WITH 6
PERCENT INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA CROB.NO.100036/2021:
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. HANAMAWWA,
W/O. HANAMAYYA GURAVIN,
AGE. 36 YEARS,
OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KORDAKERA,
TALUK. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583277.
2. NINGAMMA,
D/O.HANAMAYYA GURAVIN,
AGE. 23 YEARS,
OCC. STUDENT, R/O. KORDAKERA,
TALUK. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583277.
3. SIDDAYYA,
S/O.HANAMAYYA GURAVIN
AGE. 21 YEARS,
12
OCC. STUDENT, R/O. KORDAKERA,
TALUK. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583277.
4. BIMAMMA,
D/O. HANAMAYYA GURAVIN,
AGE. 19 YEARS,
OCC. STUDENT, R/O. KORDAKERA,
TALUK. KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583277.
5. CHIDNANDA,
S/O.HANAMAYYA GURAVIN,
AGE. 17 YEARS,
MINOR U/G OF HIS NATURAL
MOTHER I.E. PETITIONER NO.1
SMT. HANAMAWWA,
W/O. HANAMAYYA GURAVIN,
AGE. 36 YEARS,
OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. KORDAKERA
TALUK, KUSHTAGI, DIST. KOPPAL-583277
...CROSS OBJECTORS.
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA
MANERAL ROAD, MINERAL DM GURGAON,
HARIYAN STATE OWNER OF LORRY NO.
HR-55/L-4370,
C/O. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
PLOT NO.3M, ND FLOOR,
SANGAM TOWER, SAVITA VIHAR,
DELHI-110092.
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100593/2021 IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
13
DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO. 250/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KUSHTAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA CROB.NO.100037/2021:
BETWEEN:
SMT. NAGAMMA,
W/O HANAMAGOUDA @
HANAMAYYA MALIPATIL @ GADDAD,
AGE 61 YEARS,
OCC AGRICULTURE AND COOLIE,
R/O KORDAKERA,
TQ KUSHTAGI, DIST KOPPAL-583277.
...CROSS OBJECTOR.
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA
MANERAL ROAD, MINERAL DM GURGAON,
HARIYAN STATE OWNER OF LORRY NO.
HR-55/L-4370,
C/O. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
PLOT NO.3M, ND FLOOR,
SANGAM TOWER, SAVITA VIHAR,
DELHI-110092.
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100591/2021 IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.256/2015 ON THE FILE OF
14
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KUSHTAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA CROB.NO.100038/2021:
BETWEEN:
SHRI. SHIVALINGAIAH,
S/O KALAKAYYA,
AGE 51 YEARS,
OCC AGRICULTURE AND LABOUR WORK,
R/O KORDAKERA, TQ: KUSHTAGI,
DIST KOPPAL-583277.
...CROSS OBJECTOR.
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA
MANERAL ROAD, MINERAL DM GURGAON,
HARIYAN STATE OWNER OF LORRY NO.
HR-55/L-4370,
C/O. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
PLOT NO.3M, ND FLOOR,
SANGAM TOWER, SAVITA VIHAR,
DELHI-110092.
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100588/2021 IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.253/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KUSHTAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
15
IN MFA CROB.NO.100039/2021:
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SHARANAMMA,
D/O. BALAPPA KARADI ,
W/O. HANAMAPPA KARADI,
AGE. 32 YEARS,
OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O.KORDAKERE, TQ. KUSHTAGI
DIST. KOPPAL-583277.
2. SMT. YALLAWWA,
D/O. BALAPPA KARADI,
AGE. 30 YEARS,
OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O.KORDAKERE, TQ. KUSHTAGI
DIST. KOPPAL-583277.
3. HONNAMMA,
W/O. NINGANAGOUDA GOUDAR,
AGE. 29 YEARS,
OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O.PARASAPUR, TQ. KUSHTAGI
DIST. KOPPAL-583277.
...CROSS OBJECTORS.
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA
MANERAL ROAD, MINERAL DM GURGAON,
HARIYAN STATE OWNER OF LORRY NO.
HR-55/L-4370,
C/O. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
PLOT NO.3M, ND FLOOR,
SANGAM TOWER, SAVITA VIHAR,
DELHI-110092.
16
2.
THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100592/2021 IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.259/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KUSHTAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA CROB.NO.100040/2021:
BETWEEN:
SMT. SHANTAMMA,
W/O. SHIDDALINGAYYA GURUVIN,
AGE. 56 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURE AND COOLIE,
R/O.KORDAKERE, TQ. KUSHTAGI,
DIST. KOPPAL-583277.
...CROSS OBJECTOR.
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
M/S. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA
MANERAL ROAD, MINERAL DM GURGAON,
HARIYAN STATE OWNER OF LORRY NO.
HR-55/L-4370,
C/O. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
PLOT NO.3M, ND FLOOR,
SANGAM TOWER, SAVITA VIHAR,
DELHI-110092.
17
2.
THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100592/2021 IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.258/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KUSHTAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA CROB.NO.100041/2021:
BETWEEN:
SHIVAMMA,
W/O. VEERABHADRAYYA @
VEERABADRAPPA SUDI,
AGE. 54 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURE AND COOLIE,
R/O. KORDAKERA, TQ. KUSHTAGI
DIST.KOPPAL-583277.
...CROSS OBJECTOR.
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
M/S. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA
MANERAL ROAD, MINERAL DM GURGAON,
HARIYAN STATE OWNER OF LORRY NO.
HR-55/L-4370,
C/O. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
PLOT NO.3M, ND FLOOR,
SANGAM TOWER, SAVITA VIHAR,
DELHI-110092.
18
2.
THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100587/2021 IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.251/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KUSHTAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA CROB.NO.100042/2021:
BETWEEN:
SHRI. PARASAPPA,
S/O. BASAPPA @ YALLAPPA MUDHOL,
AGE. 56 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURE AND LABOUR WORK,
R/O. KORDAKERA, TQ. KUSHTAGI
DIST. KOPPAL-583277.
...CROSS OBJECTOR.
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA
MANERAL ROAD, MINERAL DM GURGAON,
HARIYAN STATE OWNER OF LORRY NO.
HR-55/L-4370,
C/O. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
PLOT NO.3M, ND FLOOR,
SANGAM TOWER, SAVITA VIHAR,
DELHI-110092.
19
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100589/2021 IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.254/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KUSHTAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION
IN MFA CROB.NO.100043/2021:
BETWEEN:
SHARANAYYA,
S/O. HANAMAYYA @ SHANTAYYA GURAVIN,
AGE. 61 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURE AND COOLIE,
R/O. KORDAKERA, TQ. KUSHTAGI
DIST.KOPPAL-583277.
...CROSS OBJECTOR.
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA
MANERAL ROAD, MINERAL DM GURGAON,
HARIYAN STATE OWNER OF LORRY NO.
HR-55/L-4370,
C/O. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
PLOT NO.3M, ND FLOOR,
SANGAM TOWER, SAVITA VIHAR,
DELHI-110092.
20
2.
THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100590/2021 IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.255/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KUSHTAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION
IN MFA CROB.NO.100044/2021:
BETWEEN:
SHRI. SHARANAYYA,
S/O SANNA HANAMAYYA GURAVIN
AGE 41 YEARS,
OCC AGRICULTURE AND COOLIE,
R/O KORDAKERA, TQ. KUSHTAGI,
DIST KOPPAL-583277.
...CROSS OBJECTOR.
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1.
M/S. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA
MANERAL ROAD, MINERAL DM GURGAON,
HARIYAN STATE OWNER OF LORRY NO.
HR-55/L-4370,
C/O. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
PLOT NO.3M, ND FLOOR,
SANGAM TOWER, SAVITA VIHAR,
DELHI-110092.
21
2.
THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100594/2021 IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.252/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KUSHTAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION
IN MFA CROB.NO.100045/2021:
BETWEEN:
SMT. SHEKHAMMA,
W/O SHIVAYYA GURUVIN,
AGE 61 YEARS,
OCC AGRICULTURE AND COOLIE,
R/O KORADAKERA, TQ KUSHTAGI,
DIST KOPPAL-583277.
...CROSS OBJECTOR.
(BY SRI H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA
MANERAL ROAD, MINERAL DM GURGAON,
HARIYAN STATE OWNER OF LORRY NO.
HR-55/L-4370,
C/O. CONTINENTAL CARRIER OF INDIA,
PLOT NO.3M, ND FLOOR,
SANGAM TOWER, SAVITA VIHAR,
DELHI-110092.
2. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
22
NO.363, 12TH A MAIN ROAD,
DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD,
6TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI DAYANAND BANDI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI SUBHASH J BADDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100596/2021 IS FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.257/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
KUSHTAGI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION
THESE APPEALS AND MFA CROBS. HAVING BEEN HEARD AND
RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 24.01.2023, THIS DAY, THE COURT
PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING AT PRINCIPAL BENCH, BENGALURU
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE:
JUDGMENT
Though these matters listed for admission, with consent of learned counsel for both parties, they are heard together and taken up for final disposal.
2. Challenging common judgment and award dated 30.11.2019 passed by Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kushtagi, in MVC nos.250/2015 to 259/2015, these appeals and cross-objections are filed.
23
3. Brief facts as stated are that on 30.09.2014, when claimant - Hanamayya and others were traveling in Tata Ace bearing registration no.KA-37/A-2912, from Ilkal to Kushtagi, lorry bearing registration no.HR-55/L- 4370 driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner dashed against Tata Ace leading to death of two inmates and injuries to others.
4. Claiming compensation for same, respective claim petitions under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 were filed by claimants and legal representatives of deceased against owner and insurer of offending lorry.
5. On service of summons, owner though entered appearance did not file objections. Only insurer filed objection opposing claim petition by stating that though vehicle was issued with insurance policy covering date of accident, it was specifically contended that driver of lorry was not 24 holding valid and effective driving licence as on date of accident and copy of driving licence produced before by was found to be fake on verification from concerned RTO. Thus, there was violation of policy conditions and hence insurer was not liable to pay compensation. It was also contended that apart from driving licence, its liability would also subject to vehicle having valid registration certificate, fitness certificate and permit. It was also contended that there was non-joinder of necessary parties as driver, owner and insurer of other vehicle involved namely Tata Ace were not made parties to claim petition, even though driver of said vehicle was solely negligent in causing accident. Apart from violation of Section 134 and 158(6) of M.V. Act, claim petitions were also opposed by denying age, occupation and income of injured/deceased inmates of Tata Ace.
25
6. Since all claim petitions were in respect of same accident, they were clubbed together and based on pleadings, tribunal framed common issues as follows:-
i) Whether petitioner prove that Hanamayya S/o Siddayya Guruvin and Muttappa S/o Balappa Karadi died and petitioners injured in a road traffic accident occurred on 30.09.2014 at about 7.30 p.m. on Ilkal - Kushtagi, NH-15 road near Hanamanal village, taluk Hunagund, district Bagalkot within limits of Ilkal police, Hunagund taluk due actionable negligence of driver of lorry bearing no.HR-55/L- 4370?
ii) Whether respondent no.2 prove that respondent no.1 driver was not having valid driving licence as on date of accident as alleged in written statement at para no.5?
iii) Whether petitioner are entitled to compensation? If so to what extent and from whom?
iv) What order?
7. To discharge burden cast under issues, PWs.1 to PW17 were examined and got marked Exhibits P1 to P69. Respondents examined two 26 witnesses as RWs.1 and RW2 and got marked Exs.R1 to R16.
8. On consideration, tribunal answered issues no.1 and 2 in affirmative, issue no.3 partly in affirmative and issue no.4 by dismissing claim petitions against respondent no.2 - insurer and awarding following compensation in respective cases with interest @ 6% p.a. against owner of offending vehicle:
Sl.
MVC numbers Compensation
Nos.
1. 250/2015 7,87,000
2 251/2015 50,000
3 252/2015 1,67,400
4 253/2015 3,06,450
5 254/2015 2,38,476
6 255/2015 1,17,800
7 256/2015 2,38,476
8 257/2015 1,25,000
9 258/2015 1,32,200
27
10 259/2015 9,49,000
9. Aggrieved by said award, owner of vehicle filed separate appeals; while claimants have filed Cross-Objections therein as under:
Sl. Cross MVC
MFA numb ers
No. Objections numbers
1 100587/2021 100041/2021 251/2015
2 100588/2021 100038/2021 253/2015
3 100589/2021 100042/2021 254/2015
4 100590/2021 100043/2021 255/2015
5 100591/2021 100037/2021 256/2015
6 100592/2021 100040/2021 258/2015
7 100593/2021 100036/2021 250/2015
8 100594/2021 100044/2021 252/2015
9 100596/2021 100045/2021 257/2015
10 100597/2021 100039/2021 259/2015
10. Sri Dayanand Bandi, learned counsel for owner, at outset submitted that without arraying driver as party merely on basis of insurer's contention, tribunal would not be justified in holding 28 that driving licence produced was fake, unless it was established that owner did not take adequate care and caution to verify genuineness of licence or was guilty of willful breach of conditions. In support of his submission, he relied upon decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Nirmala Kothari v.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 1 and United India Insurance Co. Vs. Lehru 2.
11. It was submitted that driving licence got marked by insurer as Exs.R4 and R.15 were in respect Gyarshi Lal Jat issued by DTO, Kekri. Therefore, without producing licence copy issued to Bhagchand S/o Nandaram, driver, who was charge sheeted for causing accident in consideration, it cannot be held that said licence was fake. It was submitted that this Court in MFA no.5197/2014 disposed of on 10.11.2022 had held that burden upon insurer cannot be held to have been 1 ( 20 2 0 ) 4 S CC 49 2 ( 2 00 3 ) 3 SCC 33 8 29 discharged, where insurer produced driving licence issued to 'A.S.Natarajan', while driver of vehicle was 'A.Natarajan'. Therefore, said ratio would apply to this case also.
12. It was further submitted that finding of tribunal on issue no.2 was based only on Ex.R14 endorsement would be perverse, as it was not stated therein that driving licence referred to was fake.
13. It was further submitted that to prove driving licence as fake, instead of examining Transport Officer, insurer had examined a computer operator working in Transport Office. Therefore, burden on insurer could not be held to have been discharged. On above grounds, learned counsel sought for allowing appeals by holding insurer liable to pay compensation.
30
14. On other hand, Sri.Subhash J. Baddi, learned counsel for insurer submitted that very conduct of owner in these proceedings was not bonafide and therefore, appellant did not deserve indulgence. It was submitted that there was no denial about service of notice in claim petition. Despite same, owner had not entered appearance. Even notices ordered during pendency of claim petitions remained unanswered. It was further submitted that insurer having taken specific contention regarding licence produced by driver of lorry was fake, it was incumbent upon owner/insured to establish otherwise. In support of his submission, learned counsel relied upon decision of Division Bench of this Court in MFA.no.2883/2012 disposed of on 31.10.2015.
15. It was further submitted that apart from examining its official, insurer had also summoned official from Transport Office to depose about 31 validity of licence produced. Though RW.2 was computer operator, he had deposed under authorization from Transport Officer, and therefore, his evidence could not be viewed as invalid. Therefore, Tribunal would not be in error for having passed impugned award by referring to his deposition. As owner - insured had failed to produce valid and effective driving licence of its driver even in appeal, there was no merit in these appeals.
16. Sri H.M. Dharigond, learned counsel for claimants - cross-objectors, submitted that claimants were seeking for enhancement of compensation, as tribunal had considered meager monthly income and assessment on overall consideration was inadequate. Even award of compensation under conventional heads was grossly inadequate. On said ground sought for enhancement of compensation.
32
17. Heard learned counsel, perused judgment and award and records.
18. From above submission, occurrence of accident involving insured vehicle and inmates of said vehicle sustaining grievous/fatal injuries therein is not in dispute. On recording finding about driving licence of insured vehicle as fake, Tribunal dismissed claim petition against insurer and held owner liable to pay compensation to claimants.
19. Challenging finding of tribunal on liability, owner is in appeal; while claimants have filed appeal for enhancement. Hence, points that arise for consideration are:
"1) Whether tribunal was justified in dismissing claim petition against insurer and fastening liability upon owner-insured?
2) Whether claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation as sought for?"33
Point No.1:
20. As per initial police investigation records - Exhibit P1 - FIR and Exhibit P2 - Complaint were registered against unknown driver of lorry bearing registration no. HR-55/L-4370. Only in Exhibit P8 - charge sheet, name of driver of lorry is mentioned as Bhagchand Nandaram, particulars of driving licence are not mentioned. For first time, insurer produced copy of driving licence marked Ex.R4. A perusal would reveal that driving licence no.RJ01A/2008/0007344 was issued by DTO, Kekri stands in name of Sri. Gyarshi Lat Jat authorizing him to drive LMV from 17.01.2008 to 16.01.2028. Transport Endorsement was also issued on 03.07.2009. In Ex.R6 issued by insurer to owner of lorry, it was specifically alleged that driving licence produced before police by lorry driver during investigation was fake, as per Ex.R8. Said notice 34 was served upon owner. As per Ex.R9, insurer had requested police to investigate about licence of driver of lorry. Ex.R12 - legal notice issued by Tata General Insurance to owner of vehicle for production of copy of driving licence, registration certificate, current fitness certificate as on date of accident. But, it appears that same was not responded to.
21. None of above material would be clinching insofar as availability or non-availability of driving licence of driver of offending lorry. In para 8.3 of impugned award, tribunal refers to deposition of RW.2 referring to Ex.R.14 and R15 and its finding on issue no.2 rests on these documents. On perusal of Ex.R14, it seems to be a letter addressed by DTO, Kekri to tribunal to grant adjournment for production of records. But perusal of order sheet of tribunal would indicate that witness summons was issued to DTO Kekri, Ajmer and Rajasthan was to 35 lead oral evidence about licence of Bhagchand son of Nandaram DL.no.RJ-01/DLC/08/7344 dated 21.02.2011.
22. However, RW.2 in his evidence does not say any thing about DL.no.RJ-01/DLC/08/7344, but states that no licence was issued in name of Mr. Bhagchand son of Nandaram. Said statement cannot be accepted for two reasons.
23. Firstly, when DTO, Officer to whom witness summons had sought for time to produce records under letter dated 19.08.2019 - Ex.R14, how computer operator examined as RW.2 was able to produce records is not explained. Secondly, RW.2 does not say anything about DL no. RJ- 01/DLC/08/7344 for which witness summons was issued. Therefore, for said two reasons, it cannot be said that Insurer had discharged burden of establishing that D.L.no.RJ-01/DLC/08/7344 was fake and no licence was issued to Mr. Bhahchand 36 S/o Nandaram. Point no.1 is, therefore, answered in negative. It is held that insurer would be liable to pay compensation to claimants and tribunal was in error in holding owner - insured liable to pay compensation.
Point no.2: Quantum of compensation:
In MFA.Crob.no.100041/2021(MVC no. 251 of 2015) :
24. Claimant Smt.Shivamma, aged 54 years sustained grievous injuries such as swelling and tenderness over right ankle leading to restriction and painful movements. Referring to wound certificate, medical bills, treatment records and X- ray - Exs.P19 to P24, tribunal observed that no disability certificate was produced. It awarded Rs.20,000/- each towards pain and suffering and loss of amenities; Rs.5,000/- towards medical expenses against bills for Rs.928/- and Rs.5,000/- towards loss of income during lay off. As claimant did not sustain fractures, award appears to be just 37 and proper and is therefore affirmed by answering point no.2 in 'negative'.
MFA.Crob.no.100038/2021(MVC no.253/2015)
25. Claimant Sri Shivalingayya, aged 45 years, sustained compound fracture of shaft of right tibia, fracture of proximal 1/3 of left tibia, fracture of mandible on right and left side. Referring to wound certificate, medical bills, treatment records and X- ray, discharge summary and disability certificate - Exs.P29 to P39, tribunal observed that disability assessed at 20% would cause loss of earning capacity at 10%. But, it considered monthly income of claimant at Rs.6,000/- notionally, which would be erroneous, as notional income assessed by Karnataka State Legal Services Committee for settlement of cases before Lok-Adalat for year 2014 is Rs.7,500/-. Therefore, Rs.7,500/- has to be considered. Applying multiplier of '14', future loss of income would be:
Rs.7,500/- X 10% X 12 X 14 = Rs.1,26,000/-. 38
26. It awarded Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering. As claimant sustained three fractures, same would be inadequate. It would be appropriate to enhance it to Rs.65,000/-. Award of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities, however, appears to be proper. While passing award, tribunal has considered medical expenses for Rs.1,55,650/- and appears to have awarded same. It also awarded Rs.5,000/- towards loss of income during lay off period. Thus, total compensation would be Rs.3,76,650/-. Therefore point no.2 is answered partly in affirmative.
MFA.Crob.no.100042/2021(MVC no.254/2015)
27. Claimant Sri Parasappa, aged 60 years sustained fracture of superior and inferior pubic rami, fracture of femur, fracture of proximal half tibia etc. Referring to wound certificate, medical bills, treatment records and X-ray, discharge summary and disability certificate - Exs.P41 to P45, tribunal observed that disability assessed was at 39 40% would cause loss of earning capacity at 10%. But, tribunal considered monthly income of claimant at Rs.6,000/- notionally, which would be erroneous as per norms adopted for settlement of cases before Lok Aaalt for year 2014 notional income is assessed at Rs.7,500/-. Therefore, Rs.7,500/- has to be considered. Applying multiplier of '9', future loss of income would be:
Rs.7,500/- X 10% X 12 X 9 = Rs.81,000/-.
28. It awarded Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering. As claimant sustained three fractures, same would be inadequate. It would be appropriate to enhance it to Rs.65,000/-. Award of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities, however appears to be proper. While passing award, tribunal has considered medical expenses of Rs.65,723/- and appears to have reimbursed same. It also appears to have awarded Rs.1,800/- towards loss of income during lay off period. Thus, total compensation would be Rs.2,38,523/-. But, tribunal has awarded 40 Rs.2,38,476/-, same is confirmed. Therefore, point no.2 is answered in negative.
MFA.Crob.no.100043/2021(MVC no.255/2015)
29. Claimant - Sharanayya s/o Hanumaiah @ Shanthaiah Guruvin, aged 60 years sustained fracture of 4 to 7 ribs. Referring to wound certificate, medical bills, treatment records and X- ray, discharge summary and disability certificate - Exs.P46 to P52, tribunal observed that disability assessed at 15% would cause loss of earning capacity at 10%. But it considered monthly income of claimant at Rs.6,000/- notionally, which would be erroneous as notional income for year 2014 is Rs.7,500/-. Therefore, Rs.7,500/- has to be considered. Applying multiplier of '9', future loss of income would be:
Rs.7,500/- X 10% X 12 X 9 = Rs.81,000/-.
30. It awarded Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering. As claimant sustained fractures of 4 ribs, same would be inadequate. It would be appropriate 41 to enhance it to Rs.45,000/-. Award of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities, however, appears to be proper. While passing award, in absence of medical bills, tribunal awarded Rs.5,000/- and Rs.3,000/- towards loss of income during lay off period, which appear justified. Thus, total compensation would be Rs.1,59,000/-. Therefore point no.2 is answered partly in affirmative.
MFA.Crob.no.100037/2021 (MVC no.256/2015)
31. Claimant - Smt.Nagamma, aged 70 years sustained compound fracture of left tibia etc. Referring to wound certificate, medical bills, treatment records and X-ray, discharge summary and disability certificate. Tribunal observed that disability assessed at 52% would cause loss of earning capacity at 10%. But, it considered monthly income of claimant at Rs.6,000/- notionally, which would be erroneous, as notional income adopted for settlement of cases before Lok Adalat for year 2014 is Rs.7,500/-. Therefore, Rs.7,500/- has to be 42 considered. Applying multiplier of '5', future loss of income would be:
Rs.7,500/- X 10% X 12 X 5 = Rs.45,000/-.
32. Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities appear to be proper. While passing award, tribunal has considered medical expenses for Rs.1,54,476/- and reimbursed same. It also appears to have awarded Rs.3,000/- towards loss of income during lay off period. Thus, total compensation would be Rs.2,47,476/-. Therefore point no.2 is answered partly in affirmative. MFA.Crob.no.100040/2021(MVC no.258/2015)
33. Claimant - Smt. Shantamma, aged 55 years sustained bilateral fracture of superior and inferior roman etc. Referring to wound certificate, medical bills, treatment records and X-ray, discharge summary and disability certificates, tribunal observed that disability assessed at 30% 43 would cause loss of earning capacity at 10%. But, it considered monthly income of claimant at Rs.6,000/- notionally, which would be erroneous as notional income adopted for settlement of cases before Lok-Adalat for year 2014 is Rs.7,500/-. Therefore, Rs.7,500/- has to be considered. Applying multiplier of '11', future loss of income would be:
Rs.7,500/- X 10% X 12 X 11 = Rs.99,000/-.
34. Tribunal awarded Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities appear to be proper. In absence of medical bills, grant of Rs.5,000/- would be justified. Likewise, award of Rs.3,000/- towards loss of income during lay off period is also proper. Thus, total compensation would be Rs.1,52,000/-. Therefore point no.2 is answered partly in affirmative.
44MFA.Crob.no.100036/2021(MVC no.250/2015)
35. Insofar as monthly income, though claimants have stated that deceased Sri. Hanamayya, aged 48 years working as agriculturist was earning Rs.2,50,000/- p.a., tribunal considered it at Rs.6,000/- notionally. Though same is not substantiated. As per norms adopted by Karnataka Legal Services Committee, for settlement of cases before Lok-adalat, notional income for year 2014 is assessed at Rs.7,500/-. Therefore, Rs.7,500/- has to be considered. Claimants are wife and four minor children i.e. five dependents. Deceased was self- employed. Therefore, as per ratio in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi 3, multiplier applicable would be '13', addition of future prospects at '25%' and deduction towards personal expenses would be '1/4'. Thus, loss of dependency would be:
Rs.7,500/- +25% -1/4 X 12 X 13 = Rs.10,96,875/-. 3 A I R 201 7 SC 515 7 45
36. Apart from above, claimants would be entitled for Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of spousal consortium and parental consortium. They would also be entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and addition of 10% towards under conventional heads. Thus, total compensation would be Rs.10,96,875/- + 2,53,000/- = Rs.13,49,875/-. Point no.2 is thus answered partly in affirmative. MFA.Crob.no.100044/2021(MVC no.252/2015)
37. Claimant - Sharanayya s/o Sannahanumaiah, aged 30 years sustained fracture of clavicle etc. Referring to wound certificate, medical bills, treatment records and X-ray, discharge summary and disability certificates, tribunal observed that disability assessed at 15% would cause loss of earning capacity at 10%. But it considered monthly income of claimant at Rs.6,000/- notionally, which would be erroneous as notional income for year 2014 is Rs.7,500/-. 46 Therefore, Rs.7,500/- has to be considered. Applying multiplier of '17', future loss of income would be:
Rs.7,500/- X 10% X 12 X 17 = Rs.1,53,000/-.
38. It awarded Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities appear to be proper. In absence of medical bills grant of Rs.5,000/- would be justified. Likewise, award of Rs.3,000/- towards loss of income during lay off period is also proper. Thus, total compensation would be Rs.2,01,000/-. Therefore point no.2 is answered partly in affirmative. MFA.Crob.no.100045/2021(MVC no.257/2015)
39. Claimant - Smt.Shekamma, aged 70 years sustained fracture of scapula. Referring to wound certificate, medical bills, treatment records and X- ray, discharge summary and disability certificates, tribunal observed that disability assessed at 10% would cause loss of earning capacity at 5%. But, it considered monthly income of claimant at 47 Rs.6,000/- notionally, which would be erroneous as notional income for year 2014 is Rs.7,500/-. Therefore, Rs.7,500/- has to be considered. Applying multiplier of '5', future loss of income would be:
Rs.7,500/- X 5% X 12 X 5 = Rs.22,500/-.
40. It awarded Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities appear proper. In absence of medical bills grant of Rs.5,000/- would be justified. Likewise, award of Rs.3,000/- towards loss of income during lay off period is also proper. Thus, total compensation would be Rs.75,500/-. But, tribunal has awarded Rs.1,25,000/-, by committing arithmetical error. Exercising power under Order XLI Rule 33 of CPC award is modified. It is held that claimant would be entitled for compensation of Rs.75,500/-, even while answering point no.2 in negative. 48 MFA.Crob.no.100039/2021(MVC no.259/2015)
41. Insofar as monthly income, though claimants stated that deceased - Hanumappa, aged 22 years working as agriculturist, earning Rs.2,50,000/- p.a. Tribunal considered it at Rs.6,000/- notionally. Though same is not substantiated. Notional income for year 2014 is Rs.7,500/-. Therefore, Rs.7,500/- has to be considered. Claimants are wife and two sisters, one of whom was unmarried. Deceased was self- employed. Therefore, as per ratio in Pranay Sethi's case (supra), multiplier applicable would be '18', addition of future prospects at '40%' and deduction towards personal expenses would be '1/3'. Thus loss of dependency :
Rs.7,500/- + 40% -1/3 X 12 X 18 = Rs.15,12,000/-
42. Apart from above, claimant no.1 would be entitled for Rs.40,000/- towards loss of spousal consortium. Claimants would also be entitled to 49 Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and addition of 10% towards under conventional heads. Thus, total compensation would be Rs.15,12,000/- + Rs.77,000/- = Rs.15,89,000/-. Point no.2 is thus answered partly in affirmative.
43. In view of aforesaid findings, I pass following:
ORDER i. Appeals filed by owner are allowed, which are as under:
Sl. Case numbers Nos.
1. MFA.no.100 587/ 2021
2. MFA.no.100 588/ 2021
3. MFA.no.100 589/ 2021
4. MFA.no.100 590/ 2021
5. MFA.no.100 591/ 2021
6. MFA.no.100 592/ 2021
7. MFA.no.100 593/ 2021
8. MFA.no.100 594/ 2021
9. MFA.no.100 596/ 2021
10. MFA.no.100 597/ 2021 ii. Amount in deposit in above appeals is ordered to be refunded to appellant.50
iii. MFA Cross-objections filed by claimants are disposed of, which are as under: Sl.
No. Case number MVC nos. Result 1 MFA Crob.no.100041/ 2021 251/2015 Allowed in pa rt 2 MFA Crob.no.100038/ 2021 253/2015 Allowed in part 3 MFA Crob.no.100042/ 2021 254/2015 Dismissed 4 MFA Crob.no.100043/ 2021 255/2015 Allowed in part 5 MFA Crob.no.100037/ 2021 256/2015 Allowed in part 6 MFA Crob.no.100040/ 2021 258/2015 Allowed in part 7 MFA Crob.no.100036/ 2021 250/2015 Allowed in part 8 MFA Crob.no.100044/ 2021 252/2015 Allowed in part 9 MFA Crob.no.100045/ 2021 257/2015 Dismissed 10 MFA Crob.no.100039/ 2021 259/2015 Allowed in part
iv. Claimants would be entitled to interest at 6% per annum from date of claim petition till deposit.
v. Insurer is directed to deposit
compensation within six weeks.
(Sd/-)
JUDGE
GRD/VMB