Karnataka High Court
Smt.Savitha vs New India Ins Co Ltd on 5 January, 2024
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:693
MFA No. 3701 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3701 OF 2021 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SAVITHA,
W/O LATE RAMACHANDRA,
AGED 28 YEARS,
2. NETHRA,
D/O LATE RAMACHANDRA,
AGED 10 YEARS,
3. KEERTHANA,
S/O LATE RAMACHANDRA,
AGED 8 YEARS,
4. VARALAKSHMI @ PRAKRUTHI,
Digitally signed
by CHAITHRA P D/O LATE RAMACHANDRA,
Location: HIGH AGED 5 YEARS,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
5. SMT. GOWRAMMA,
W/O LATE RAMEGOWDA,
AGED 63 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/AT: HUNASEMARADADODDI,
KASABA HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DIST - 562 117.
(SINCE APPELLANTS NO.2, 3 AND 4 ARE
MINORS, THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR
MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN,
THE 1ST APPELLANT.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. PRAKASH M.H., ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:693
MFA No. 3701 of 2021
AND:
1. NEW INDIA INS. CO. LTD.,
NO.09, 2ND FLOOR, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS,
MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD,
BANGALORE -560 011,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
2. SRI. KESHAVAL IYENGAR,
S/O SHARMA IYENGAR,
AGE: MAJOR,
R/AT SINGARAJAPURA VILLAGE,
CHANNAPATTANA,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR SAMPRATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH VIDE
ORDER DATED 18.07.2022)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.01.2021 PASSED IN MVC
NO.6784/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, PRINCIPAL
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AND CHIEF JUDGE,
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU AND TO ENHANCE THE
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 28.01.2021 passed by the Member Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Chief judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru (for short 'the Tribunal') in MVC No.6784/2018. This appeal is founded on the premise of -3- NC: 2024:KHC:693 MFA No. 3701 of 2021 inadequacy of compensation. Hence, the appellants seek enhancement of compensation.
2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are as under;
That on 02.11.2018 at about 08.15 p.m., Sri.Ramachandra was walking as a pedestrian on the extreme side of Kanakapura-Sangam Road at Aralalu village, Kanakapura taluk, Ramanagara district. At that time, the driver of canter goods vehicle bearing registration No.KA-03-C- 2547 came from Sangam side towards Kanakapura, at high speed, in a rash and negligent manner so as to endanger human life and dashed against Ramachandra. As a result of the impact, Ramachandra sustained severe injuries all over the body and succumbed to fatal injuries on spot. Thereafter, the post mortem was conducted in Government Hospital, Kanakapura and the claimants performed the last rites by incurring huge expenses.
3.1 The claimants are the legal representatives of deceased Ramachandra being wife, three minor children and -4- NC: 2024:KHC:693 MFA No. 3701 of 2021 mother, aged 60 years. Though the claimants have stated that the deceased Ramachandra was working and earning Rs.30,000/- per month by doing agricultural and sericulture works, milk and vegetable vending and maintaining the family. The claimants were wholly dependant upon the earnings of the deceased Ramachandra. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the claimants have been put to untold hardship and misery.
3.2 It is the case of the claimants that a case has been registered against the driver of goods vehicle bearing No.KA- 03-C-2547 and respondent No.1 is the owner and respondent No.2 is the insurer of the same and hence, claimants filed a claim petition seeking compensation.
3.3 On service of notice, respondent No.1 remained absent and he was placed ex-parte. Respondent No.2- Insurance Company appeared through its counsel and filed objections statement, wherein it had admitted the issuance of policy in respect of the canter goods vehicle bearing No.KA-03- C-2547 and it being valid from 08.02.2018 to 07.02.2019 and being in force as on the date of accident. However, it is stated -5- NC: 2024:KHC:693 MFA No. 3701 of 2021 that its liability is subject to the terms and conditions of the policy. Further, it is stated that it denies the occurrence of the accident, involvement of the goods vehicle as it is not within its knowledge and as the insured has not intimated the same. It is stated that the insured has not submitted the required documents and has violated the conditions of the policy. It is stated that the insured vehicle was not having permit and fitness certificate and the driver was not having valid and effective driving licence and the owner of the canter vehicle has knowingly allowed his vehicle to be driven by a person who was not having driving licence and has violated the Motor Vehicles Rules and hence, the contract between the insured and insurer has become void and policy is not enforceable. The age, avocation and income of the deceased and dependency of the claimants on the income of the deceased are not admitted as the same are not within the knowledge of respondent No.2. It is stated that the amount of compensation claimed is excessive and exorbitant. It is further pleaded that the accident has occurred solely due to the negligence of the deceased who crossed the road where there was no zebra crossing or pedestrian crossing. There is no negligence on the part of the -6- NC: 2024:KHC:693 MFA No. 3701 of 2021 driver of insured canter goods vehicle and accordingly, respondent No.2 has prayed for dismissal of the petition.
3.4 On the basis of pleadings, the tribunal framed relevant issues for consideration.
3.5 In order to substantiate the issues and to establish the case, claimant No.1 was examined as PW.1 and another witness as PW.2 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to P15. On the other hand, respondent No.2-Insurance Company examined driver of the canter goods vehicle as RW-1.
3.6 On the basis of material evidence both oral and documentary and on hearing the submissions of learned counsel for both parties, the tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.26,49,500/- with interest @ 6% per annum to the claimants.
3.7 Being aggrieved by the meager compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimants are before this Court challenging the impugned judgment and award.
4. The main contention of the learned counsel for the claimants is that the tribunal while adjudicating the claim -7- NC: 2024:KHC:693 MFA No. 3701 of 2021 petition has not taken into consideration the facts of the case on a proper perspective. He further contends that the deceased was doing agriculture activities and holding sufficient lands, which are established at Ex.P14, the RTC's produced. He contends that just because the fact that the RTC's are standing in the name of the father of the deceased, who is also no more, the same could not be a fact to disregard the probable income of the deceased. The tribunal has assessed the income at Rs.12,000/- per month, which is on the lower side. Accordingly, he seeks enhancement of compensation and to allow the appeal preferred by the claimants.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.1- Insurance Company submits that the tribunal is right in awarding just and reasonable compensation, which does not call for interference. Therefore, on these grounds, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.
6. Having heard learned counsel for claimants and learned counsel for respondent No.1-Insurance Company, the claimants are the legal representatives of deceased Ramachandra being wife, three minor children and mother, -8- NC: 2024:KHC:693 MFA No. 3701 of 2021 aged 60 years. Though the claimants have contended that the deceased Ramachandra was working and earning Rs.30,000/- per month by doing agriculture, no documentary proof is produced before the tribunal to show the income. The income of the deceased assessed by the tribunal is Rs.12,000/- per month, whereas the notional income chart of the Legal Services Authority prescribes the income of Rs.12,500/- for the accident of the year 2018. Accordingly, income is taken as Rs.12,500/-. The age of the deceased was 32 years. The tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier at '16', which does not call for interference.
7. The tribunal has rightly awarded 40% in addition to the income as future prospects and deducted 1/4th of the income towards personal expenses of the deceased, which also does not call for interference. Hence, the income shall be taken as Rs.13,125/- per month (Rs.12,500/- + 40% - 1/4th). Hence, loss of dependency would be Rs.25,20,000/- (Rs.13,125/- x 12 x 16) as against Rs.24,19,200/- awarded by the tribunal.
8. Towards loss of consortium, loss of parental consortium and loss of filial consortium, the tribunal has -9- NC: 2024:KHC:693 MFA No. 3701 of 2021 awarded totally Rs.2,00,000/-. Towards funeral expenses and loss of estate, tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- each, in all Rs.30,000/-, the same does not call for interference. However, in addition to the same, the tribunal has not awarded 10% escalation towards block period on the loss of consortium and 10% on the loss of conventional heads in accordance to the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680. Therefore, the same would be computed as Rs.2,20,000/- (Rs.2,00,000/- + 10%) and Rs.33,000/- (Rs.30,000/- + 10%).
9. In view of the above, the claimants would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.27,73,000/- as against Rs.26,49,500/- as mentioned in the table below:
Heads Amount in Rs.
Loss of dependency 25,20,000-00
Loss of consortium, loss of 2,20,000-00
parental consortium and loss
of filial consortium
Loss of estate and funeral 33,000-00
expenses
TOTAL 27,73,000-00
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:693
MFA No. 3701 of 2021
Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed-in-part;
ii) The judgment and award dated 28.01.2021 passed by
the Member, Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru in MVC.No.6784/2018 is modified;
iii) The claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.27,73,000/- as against Rs.26,49,500/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization;
iv) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal shall stand intact with regard to deposit;
v) The enhanced compensation amount shall be paid within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE CPN CT: BHK