IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
M.F.A.No.753/2018 (MV)
BETWEEN :
1. NAGANNA @ GOUDRA NAGARAJAPPA
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURIST
2. SMT.HALAMMA
W/O NAGANNA @ GOUDRA NAGARAJAPPA,
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC:HOUSE HOLD WORK
BOTH ARE R/AT SALAGATTE VILLAGE,
JAGALUR TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 521 ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI R.SATISH CHANDRA, ADV.)
AND :
1. G.O.JAGADISH
S/O OMKARAPPA G., AGE: 24 YEARS,
DRIVER OF TRACTOR & TRAILER
BEARING REG.NO.KA16/TA-7046-47
R/O NANDIHALLI VILLAGE
CHOULIHALLI POST,
CHITRADURGA TALUK & DISTRICT-577 501
2. OMKARAPPA G.,
S/O NAGAPPA, AGE: 22 YEARS,
OWNER OF TRACTOR & TRAILER
BEARING REG.NO.KA16/TA-7046-47
-2-
R/AT NANDIHALLI VILLAGE
CHOULIHALLI POST,
CHITRADURGA TALUK & DISTRICT-577 501
3. DIVISIONAL MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE:MELAGIRI PLAZA,
OPPOSITE TO DENTAL COLLEGE,
MCC B BLOCK,
DAVANAGERE-577 002 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M.NARAYANAPPA, ADV. FOR R-3; R-1 & R-2 SERVED.)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
M.V.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
17.05.2017 PASSED IN MVC No.319/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE
I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & V MACT, DAVANAGERE,
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
S. SUJATHA, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 17.05.2017 passed in MVC No.319/2016 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and V Addl. MACT, Davanagere [Tribunal for short].
2. The claimants instituted the petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation for the death of Manjunath in the road traffic accident.
-3-
3. It was averred in the claim petition that the deceased Manjunath while travelling in the motor cycle bearing Reg. No.KA-16-ED-0993 along with the pillion rider P. Rakesh, met with the road traffic accident on 31.1.2015 at about 8.30 p.m. owing to the actionable negligence of the driver of the Tractor and Trailer bearing Reg.No.KA-16-TA-7046-47(offending vehicle). As a result, the deceased succumbed to the accidental injuries on 4.2.2016 at about 1.30 p.m. while taking treatment at Kasturba Hospital, Manipal.
4. It was contended that the deceased was an agriculturist besides working at petrol bunk. The untimely death of the deceased has caused mental shock and agony. The claimants have lost the earning member with loss of dependency, love and affection etc.,
5. On these set of facts and grounds, the claimants sought for compensation. -4-
6. In response to the notice issued by the Tribunal, the respondent No.1 has failed to appear and as such he was placed exparte. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 appeared through their respective counsel and filed their independent objection statement. The defence set up was that the petitions are not maintainable in law or on facts. The rash and negligent riding of the claimant was the cause of the accident. Admitting the issuance of the policy, it was contended that the liability, if any, shall be subject to the policy conditions.
7. On the basis of the pleadings, the following issues were framed:
1. Whether the petitioner proves that on 31.1.2016 at about 8.30 p.m. near Dyapanahalli cross road, Chitradurga Taluk, when the deceased was proceeding in his motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KA 15/ED-0993, respondent No.1 being the driver of the tractor -5- Trolley bearing Reg.No.KA 16/TA 7046-47 has drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner motor cycle, for which he has sustained grievous injuries and succumbed at Kasturba Manipal Hospital?
2. Whether the petitioners prove that they are the legal heirs and dependents of the deceased?
3. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation as prayed? If so, from whom and what is the quantum?
4. What order?
8. The Tribunal answered the issue Nos.1 and 2 in the affirmative and issue No.3 partly in the affirmative. The petition filed by the claimants was partly allowed awarding total compensation of Rs.8,85,359/- with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of the petition till its realization. -6-
9. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants have preferred the present appeal.
10. Learned counsel for the claimants/appellants submitted that the Tribunal failed to appreciate the material evidence available on record in determining the income of the deceased and committed a palpable error in awarding a meager compensation much against the settled principles of law vis-a-vis the oral and documentary evidence placed on record.
11. Learned counsel for the insurer justifying the impugned judgment and award argued that the Tribunal on analyzing the oral and documentary evidence has awarded just compensation and the same does not call for any further enhancement. -7-
12. We have carefully considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the original records.
13. The Tribunal though determined the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- notionally, in view of the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, which is consistently followed by this Court while determining the monthly income of the deceased in the road traffic accident, we deem it apt to refer to the same. Accordingly the monthly income can be safely re- determined at Rs.9,000/- notionally. Adding 40% of the same towards the future prospects, the total income would work out to Rs.12,600/- (Rs.9000 + Rs.3600). Applying the multiplier of 17 considering the age of the deceased as 28 years, deducting 50% towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, loss of dependency -8- would work out to Rs.12,85,200/- (Rs.12,600 x 12 x 17 ÷ 2).
14. In terms of the ruling of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others ((2017)16 SCC 680) and New India Assurance Company Limited V/s. Somwati and Others reported in 2020 SCC online SC 720, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- under different heads. The claimants are also entitled to medical expenses of Rs.1,13,359/- as awarded by the Tribunal.
Sl.No. Particulars Amount [in Rs.]
1. Loss of dependency 12,85,200
Filial Consortium
2. (Rs.40000 to each 80,000
parent)
3. Loss of Estate 15,000
4. Funeral expenses 15,000
Towards medical
5. 1,13,359
expenses
Total 15,08,559
Thus in all, the claimants are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.15,08,559/- with interest @ 6% p.a. -9- on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till its realization.
15. Hence the following:
ORDER i] Appeal is allowed in part.
ii] The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified and enhanced to Rs.15,08,559/- as against Rs.8,85,359/- which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of the claim petition till its realization.
iii] The insurance company shall deposit the re-
assessed total compensation determined as aforesaid before the Tribunal within 90 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment and order.
iv] The portion of the order of the Tribunal inasmuch as liability, apportionment and disbursement remains intact.
- 10 -
v] The modified compensation shall be disbursed in terms of the order of the Tribunal.
vi] Draw modified award accordingly. vii] Registry shall transfer the amount in deposit along with the original records to the jurisdictional Tribunal forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE Dvr: