Karnataka High Court
The Branch Manager vs Ramegowda M N on 29 July, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:29870
MFA No. 6448 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
MFA NO. 6448 OF 2017 C/W
MFA NO. 2443 OF 2017 (MV-D)
IN MFA NO. 6448/2017
BETWEEN:
1. RAMEGOWDA M.N.
S/O. NANJEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
2. POORNIMA
W/O. RAMEGOWDA M.N.
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
3. LOKESH M R
S/O. RAMEGOWDA M.N.
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
ALL ARE R/AT MACHANAHALLI VILLAGE
HELEBEEDU HOBLI, BELUR TALUK 573 115
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. JAGADEESH H T., ADV.)
Digitally signed by AND:
PRAJWAL A
Location: HIGH COURT 1. ANNAPPA
OF KARNATAKA S/O. CHELUABHOVI
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT NARSHIPURA VILLAGE
RAJANASRIURU POST
HALEBEEDU HOBLI
BELUR TALUK 573 115
2. CHELUVABHOVI
S/O. CHINNABHOVI
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS
R/AT NARSHIPURA VILLAGE
RAJANASHRIURU POST
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:29870
MFA No. 6448 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017
HALEBEEDU HOBLI
BELUR TALUK 573 115
HASSAN DISTRICT
3. THE MANAGER
BHARATHI AXA GENERAL
INSURANCE CO LTD.
TEMPLE ROAD
KALIDASA CIRCLE
VV MOHALLA
NO. 2951:A D 29:1
1ST FLOOR, MYSORE 570 002
REP. BY THE MANAGER
BHARATHI AXA GENERAL
INSURANCE CO LTD
TEMPLE INSURANCE ZONE
BJS BUILDING, BEHIND
BSNL BHAVAN, B M ROAD
HASSAN 573 201 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADV. FOR R3;
VIDE ORDER DATED 27.06.2024,
NOTICE TO R1 & R2 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.03.2016
PASSED IN MVC NO.848/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE, M.A.C.T., BELUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
IN MFA NO. 2443/2017
BETWEEN:
THE BRANCH MANAGER
BHARATI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD, TEMPLE ROAD
KALIDASA CIRCLE, V V MOHALLA
NO. 2951A D 29/1, 1ST FLOOR
MYSORE 570 002. NOW REP.
BY ITS MANAGER
M/S BHARATI AXA GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,
1ST FLOOR, FERNS ICON
SURVEY NO. 28, DODDANEKUNDI
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:29870
MFA No. 6448 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017
BANGALORE 560 037
THE BRANCH MANAGER
BHARATHI AXA GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
TEMPLE INSURANCE ZONE
G.J.S. BUILDING
BEHIND BSNL BUILDING
B.M.ROAD, HASSAN ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADV.)
AND:
1. RAMEGOWDA M.N.
S/O. NANJEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
2. POORNIMA
W/O. RAMEGOWDA M.N.
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
3. LOKESH M R
S/O. RAMEGOWDA M.N.
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
ALL ARE R/AT MACHANAHALLI VILLAGE
HELEBEEDU HOBLI, BELUR TALUK 573 201
4. ANNAPPA
S/O. CHELUABHOVI
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
R/AT NARSHIPURA VILLAGE
RAJANASRIURU POST
HALEBEEDU HOBLI
BELUR TALUK 573 201
5. CHELUVABHOVI
S/O. CHINNABHOVI
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/AT NARSHIPURA VILLAGE
RAJANASHRIURU POST
HALEBEEDU HOBLI
BELUR TALUK 573 201
HASSAN DISTRICT ... RESPONDENTS
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:29870
MFA No. 6448 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017
(BY SRI.H.T.JAGADEESH, ADV. FOR R1 TO R3;
VIDE ORDER DATED 27.06.2024
NOTICE TO R4 IS DISPENSED WITH;
R5 IS SERVED)
THIS MFA FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.03.2016
PASSED IN MVC NO.848/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE, & MACT, BELUR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF
Rs.10,87,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF
PETITION.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
In these two appeals, both the petitioners as well as the Insurance Company have challenged the judgment and award dated 01.03.2016 passed in M.V.C.No.848/2015 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and MACT at Belur ('the Tribunal' for brevity).
2. For the sake of convenience, the rank of the parties shall be referred to as per their status before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are, the son of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and brother of petitioner No.3 by name Sathish, the deceased, met with an accident -5- NC: 2024:KHC:29870 MFA No. 6448 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017 on 14.02.2015 while riding his motor cycle bearing No.KA-46/H-5135 hit by the Tractor/Trailor bearing No.KA-46/T-4629 and KA-18/T-1192 at Halebidu Tankbund and sustained injuries; he was admitted to Janapriya Hospital, Hassan and he died on 16.02.2015 on account of injuries sustained in the accident. The petitioners as the dependants have approached the Tribunal seeking grant of compensation. The claim was opposed by the Insurance Company of the Tractor/Trailor. After taking the evidence and hearing both sides, the Tribunal by the impugned judgment awarded compensation of Rs.10,87,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum. Seeking enhancement, the petitioners have filed M.F.A.No.6448/2017 whereas challenging the liability to pay compensation, the Insurance Company has filed M.F.A.No.2443/2017.
4. Heard the arguments of Sri.H.T.Jagadeesh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri.B.Pradeep, learned counsel for the Insurance Company. -6-
NC: 2024:KHC:29870 MFA No. 6448 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017
5. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the accident is of the year 2015, deceased was aged 21 years, earning Rs.30,000/- per month, the Tribunal has taken income at only Rs.6,000/- per month. Compensation assessed under conventional heads is lower and sought for enhancement.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company has contended that the Tribunal has taken the future prospects at 50% instead of 40% for an agriculturist with no proof of income and the interest awarded at 9% per annum is excess. The Tribunal has committed an error in fastening the liability against the Insurance Company as the driver of the Tractor did not possess valid driving licence to drive the Trailor. Hence, the liability has to be taken off from the Insurance Company and the owner has to pay the compensation.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:29870 MFA No. 6448 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for both parties and perused the records.
8. The material on record shows that there was an accident on 14.02.2015 involving the motor cycle and the Tractor in question in which the deceased Satish has sustained injuries and died in the hospital after 3 days of the accident. The petitioners have spent some money towards treatment. The Police records show that the driver of the Tractor has been charge sheeted and he has faced the trial. The evidence did not point out anything that there was contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. Hence, the petitioners, who are the parents and brother being the dependants are entitled to claim compensation.
9. In a case of this nature, compensation has to be determined by following the principles settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance -8- NC: 2024:KHC:29870 MFA No. 6448 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017 Co.Ltd. -vs- Pranay Sethi and Others 1 and Sarla Varma (Smt.) and Others -vs- Delhi Transport Corporation and Another2.
10. The accident is of the year 2015. In the year 2015, one can make a reasonable case that a person with no proof of income will earn not less than Rs.9,000/- per month. In view of the principles laid down in Pranay Sethi's case, 40% of future prospects has to be considered for the age of 21 years. Therefore, the loss of dependency has to be calculated thus: Rs.9,000/- + Rs.3,600/- (40%) = Rs.12,600/- - Rs.6,300/- (50%) = Rs.6,300/- x 12 x 18 = Rs.13,60,800/-. The deceased left behind his parents and brother. Hence, towards parental consortium and loss of love and affection to the brother Rs.40,000/- each has to be assessed. Towards funeral expenses and loss of estate, Rs.15,000/- each is assessed. In view of judgment in Pranay Sethi's case, 10% 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 -9- NC: 2024:KHC:29870 MFA No. 6448 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017 appreciation has to be given under the conventional heads and it comes to Rs.15,000/-. The medical bills shows that Rs.14,400/- has been spent. Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side. Hence, medical expenses is considered at Rs.15,000/-. Thereby the total compensation comes to Rs.15,40,800/- as against Rs.10,87,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the petitioners are entitled for enhancement of Rs.4,53,800/-, which is the just compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case.
11. As regards rate of interest is concerned, the Tribunal has awarded 9% interest. Taking judicial notice that in the year 2015, no Banks including the private Banks would have offered interest @ 9% to the amount kept in Fixed Deposit. The Division Bench of this court in Ms.Joyeeta Bose and Ors. -vs- Venkateshan.V. and Ors. in M.F.A.No.5896/2018 c/w M.F.A.Nos.4444/2018 and 4659/2018 (MV) DD 24.08.2020 with reference to Section 149(1) of Motor
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:29870 MFA No. 6448 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017 Vehicles Act, 1988, Rule 253 of Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and Section 34 of Civil Procedure Code, at Para 52 has laid down principles regarding award of interest, it reads thus:
"52.Thus, under Section 34 of CPC being squarely applicable to the interest awarded by the tribunal and Section 34 empowering the tribunal to award pendente lite interest and discretion being vested with the Court/Tribunal to award interest from the date of suit or petition is to the maximum extent of 6% p.a. or in other words, not exceeding 6% p.a., the contention raised by the learned Advocates appearing for the Insurance Company deserves to be accepted and accordingly, it is accepted. . . . . . . . . ."
12. As seen from the catena of decisions, only in the cases where special reasons are recorded, higher rate of interest is awarded. Here in this case, the Tribunal has not assigned any reason for awarding higher rate of interest. The interest awarded by the Tribunal at 9% per annum is not comparable to prevailing Bank rate of interest. Since the Insurance Company has challenged the same, the rate of interest shall be not more than 6%.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:29870 MFA No. 6448 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017
13. As regards liability is concerned, there is no dispute that the driver of the Tractor was holding valid driving licence to drive the Tractor. Trailor is not motorable unless it is fixed to Tractor. There is no evidence on record to show that non-holding of driving licence for the Trailor was the cause for the accident for fastening the liability on the Insurance Company. Hence, Insurance Company cannot be allowed to urge such contention to avoid its liability. Hence, the owner and the Insurance Company have to pay compensation jointly and severally. Both the appeals merit consideration, in the result, the following:
ORDER
(i) Both appeals are partly allowed;
(ii) The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified;
(iii) The petitioners are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.4,53,800/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:29870 MFA No. 6448 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 2443 of 2017 the total compensation from the date of petition till its realization;
(iv) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount with interest @ 6% within eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.
(v) Rest of the judgment and award of the Tribunal is kept intact;
(vi) The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal along with records.
SD/-
(T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA) JUDGE KNM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48