Karnataka High Court
Mr Jeson D Souza @ D Souza Jeson vs Hanumanthegouda B Patil on 30 July, 2024
Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30100
MFA No. 7394 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7394 OF 2018 (MV-
DM)
BETWEEN:
MR JESON D SOUZA @ D SOUZA JESON
S/O LATE JAMES D SOUZA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
R/AT VIVEK NAGAR HOUSE
PANJIMOGARU POST, MANGALORE-13
NOW R/AT FLAT NO.13
5TH FLOOR, SURVEY NO.83-5
NEHAL APARTMENT
OPP:OLD KACHERA DEPOT
KOTHRUD, PUNE-38.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY G.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. HANUMANTHEGOUDA B PATIL
Digitally signed by S/O BHIMANAGOUDA
HEMALATHA A AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
Location: HIGH R/AT LAXANATTI APARTMENTS
COURT OF
KARNATAKA MUDHOL TALUK, BAGALKOT -587 101.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE IFFOC-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
SUDEV PLAZA, 3RD FLOOR
DAJIBAN PETH, OPP:LAXMI TEMPLE
HUBLI-580029.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MAMTHA S SHANKAR., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30100
MFA No. 7394 of 2018
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15/07/2016,
PASSED IN MVC NO.255/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT,
MANGALURU, D.K., PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been filed by the claimant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 15.07.2016 passed by MACT and II Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mangaluru, D.K. in MVC No.255/2015.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that the petitioner is the RC owner of the Car bearing Registration No.MH-12-HV-201. On 28.12.2014 at about 06.00 p.m., the petitioner was driving the said Car from the side of Valencia towards Panambur on NH-66 i.e. Nanthoor-Kuloor high way slowly and carefully by observing the rules and regulations of the traffic and -3- NC: 2024:KHC:30100 MFA No. 7394 of 2018 proceeding on the extreme left side of the tar road. At about 06.00 p.m., when the Car reached near Kodiakl cross on NH-66, Nanthoor-Kuloor road, Mangalore Taluk, the driver of the tanker lorry bearing Registration No.AP- 16-TC-4757 drove the same in high speed in a rash and negligent manner and came from hind side and dashed to the hind side of the said car. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the said Car was turned and dashed to the divider.
3. The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation for the damage caused to his vehicle. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred purely on account of the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.
4. Upon service of notice, the respondent No.2 appeared through counsel and filed written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. The -4- NC: 2024:KHC:30100 MFA No. 7394 of 2018 respondent No.1, despite service of notice, did not appear before the Tribunal and was placed ex-parte.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter, recorded the evidence. The claimant, in order to prove the case, examined himself as PW-1, and other two witnesses were examined as PW-2 and PW-3, and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P24. On behalf of the respondents, no witness was examined but got exhibited a document namely Ex.R1. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which, the vehicle of the claimant has been damaged. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,17,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed. -5-
NC: 2024:KHC:30100 MFA No. 7394 of 2018
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has submitted that the claimant is the owner of the vehicle bearing Registration No.MH-12-HV-201. Due to the accident, his vehicle was damaged. He has produced Ex.P16-Inspection report submitted by the surveyor and Ex.P17-Estimation, which disclosed that the car was repaired in the show room and charge for the same was Rs.2,50,343.61 Ps. He also produced Ex.P18 and Ex.P19, the receipt and tax invoice for Rs.2,08,203/- for affecting the repairs work in respect of the damages caused to the car of the claimant. Therefore, it is very clear that the claimant has produced necessary documents to show that he has invested more than Rs.2,50,000/-. The Tribunal has erred in not considering Ex.P16 to Ex.P20. Hence, he sought for enhancement of compensation.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has submitted that even thought the survey inspection report discloses that the vehicle requires -6- NC: 2024:KHC:30100 MFA No. 7394 of 2018 Rs.2,50,343.61 Ps. for repairs, the model of the vehicle is of the year 2012 and the total repair charges claimed by the claimant is on higher side. Considering the vehicle model, evidence of the parties and documents available on record, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. He further contended that in light of the Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Ms.Joyeeta Bose and others -v- Venkateshan.V and others (MFA 5896/2018 and connected matters disposed of on 24.8.2020), the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 9% p.a. on the compensation amount appears excessive. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.
9. It is not in dispute that the claimant's car bearing No.MH-12-HV-201 was damaged in the road traffic accident occurred on 28.12.2014 due to rash and -7- NC: 2024:KHC:30100 MFA No. 7394 of 2018 negligent driving of the offending lorry bearing No.AP-16- TC-4757 by its driver.
10. The claimant has produced Ex.P16-Inspection report issued by the surveyor, which reflects that Rs.2,50,343.61 Ps. required for the purpose of repairs. Ex.P18 and Ex.P19, the receipt and tax invoice for Rs.2,08,203/- for affecting the repairs work in respect of the damages caused to the car of the claimant. He also produced Ex.P20, letter issued by the Cauvery Ford Company for the purpose of picking of the damaged car from Urwa Police Station to the Garage. Considering the evidences of PW-1-claimant, PW- 2-Surveyor and PW-3-Manager of the Garage and Ex.P16 to Ex.20, I am of the opinion that the compensation of Rs.1,17,000/- awarded by the Tribunal has to be enhanced to Rs.1,50,000/- with interest at 6% per annum.
11. Accordingly, the following order is passed:
ORDER
a) The appeal is allowed in part. -8-
NC: 2024:KHC:30100 MFA No. 7394 of 2018
b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
c) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-.
d) Following the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of 'MS.JOYEETA BOSE' (supra), the enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6% per annum.
e) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
f) In view of the order dated 30.07.2024 passed by this Court, the claimant is not entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation for the delayed period of 671 days in filing the appeal.
Sd/-
(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE HA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 55