Karnataka High Court
Smt Manjunath V Bhat vs The Principal on 13 December, 2021
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.7685 OF 2016(MV)
C/W
MFA No.7485 OF 2016(MV)
IN MFA 7685/2016
BETWEEN:
SRI MANJUNATH V BHAT
S/O VENKATARAMAN
NOW AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
R/O NO.99/10
V CROSS, NARAYANAPPA ROAD
RAMASWAMYPALYA
MARUTHISEVANAGAR
BANGALORE-560 033.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RANGEGOWDA N R., ADV. )
AND
1. THE PRINCIPAL
BRUNDAVAN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING,
BAGALUR MAIN ROAD
YELAHANKA,
BANGALORE 560 064.
2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO., LTD.,
T.P. HUB, BO. 44-45
IV FLOOR, LEO COMPLEX
2
RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS
M.G. ROAD
BANGALORE 560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.ASHOK N PATIL ,ADV.FOR R2:
NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W V/O DTD 03.10.2017)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:11.08.2016 PASSED
IN MVC NO.1948/15 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER,
PRINCIPAL MACT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA 7485/2016
BETWEEN:
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED
T.P.HUB 44-45, IV FLOOR
LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX
RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS
M.G.ROAD
BENGALURU-560001
NOW REPRESENTED
BY MANAGER LEGAL.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. ASHOK N PATIL, ADV.)
AND
1. SRI MANJUNATH V BHAT
S/O VENKATARAMAN
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
3
R/AT NO.99/10, V CROSS
NARAYANAPPA ROAD
RAMASWAMYPALYA
MARUTHISEVANAGAR
BENGALURU-560 033.
2. THE PRINCIPAL
BRUNDAVAN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
BAGALUR MAIN ROAD
YELAHANKA
BENGALURU-560 064.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.N R RANGE GOWDA, ADV. FOR R1:
NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W V/O DATED: 3.10.217)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:11.08.2016 PASSED
IN MVC NO.1948/15 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER,
PRINCIPAL MACT, BENGALURU, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.17,30,000/- WITH INTEREST AT
9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALISATION.
THESE MFAs COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
MFA No.7685/2016 has been filed by the
claimant and MFA No.7485/2016 has been filed by the
Insurance Company under Section 173(1) of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as
'the Act', for short) being aggrieved by the judgment
dated 11.08.2016 passed by the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC No.1948/2015.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeals
briefly stated are that on 28.03.2015 at about 06.15
P.M. when the deceased was proceeding on a
motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-09-EV-9415 on
Indira Nagar 100 feet Road on extreme left side of the
road and when he reached near Petrol Bunk, at that
time, driver of the School Bus bearing registration
No.KA-50-3503 came in a rash and negligent manner
and dashed against the deceased's motorcycle from
behind. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the
deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed
to the injuries.
3. The claimants filed a petition under Section
166 of the Act seeking compensation for the death of
the deceased along with interest.
4. On service of summons, the respondent
No.2 being the insurer has appeared through counsel
and filed written statement in which the averments
made in the petition were denied. It was pleaded that
the petition itself is false and frivolous in the eye of
law. It was further pleaded that the accident was due
to the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by
the deceased himself and he was not holding a valid
and effective driving licence as on the date of the
accident. The liability is subject to terms and
conditions of the policy. The age, occupation and
income of the deceased are denied. It was further
pleaded that the quantum of compensation claimed by
the claimants is exorbitant. Hence, he sought for
dismissal of the petition.
The respondent No.1 did not appear before the
Tribunal inspite of service of notice and hence 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
his case, examined himself as PW-1 and another
witness as PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely
Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.18. On behalf of respondents, two
witnesses were examined as RW-1 and RW-2 but no
documents have been exhibited. The Claims Tribunal,
by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the
accident took place on account of rash and negligent
riding of the offending vehicle by its rider, as a result
of which, the deceased sustained injuries and
succumbed to the injuries. The Tribunal further held
that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of
Rs.17,30,000/- 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, these appeals have been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimants has
raised the following contentions:
Firstly, the claimant claims that the deceased
was aged about 24 years at the time of the accident.
He was studying MBA at IBMR International College,
Koramangala. The deceased was a brilliant student.
Due to unfortunate accident, he was lost bright future
prospects. Considering the same, the Tribunal is not
justified in taking the monthly income of the deceased
as Rs.10,000/- is on lower side.
Secondly, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal under the conventional heads is on the lower
side. Hence, he prays for enhancement of
compensation.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for
the Insurance Company has raised the following
counter-contentions:
Firstly, at the time of the accident, the deceased
was a student and he was a non-earning member in
the family. Therefore, the Tribunal has to be assessed
the income of the deceased on the basis of the
notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka
State Legal Services Authority that for the accident
occurred in the year 2015, the notional income of the
deceased has to be taken Rs.9,000/- per month. But
the notional income of Rs.10,000/- assessed by the
Tribunal is on higher side.
Secondly, the Tribunal instead of considering
40% income of the deceased towards 'future
prospects', has considered 50% and the compensation
of Rs.1,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the
head of 'Conventional Head' is also on higher side.
Both are contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE
CO. LTD. -v- PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS [AIR 2017
SC 5157].
Lastly, in view of judgment of the Division Bench
of this Court in the case of MS.JOYEETA BOSE AND
OTHERS vs. VENKATESHAN.V AND OTHERS (MFA
5896/2018 and connected matters disposed of on
24.8.2020), the claimants are entitled for 6% interest
but the Tribunal has granted 9% interest which is on
the higher side. Hence, he sought for allowing the
appeal filed by the Insurance Company and dismissing
the appeal filed by the claimant.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the judgment and award.
9. It is not in dispute that Akshay M. Bhat
died in the road traffic accident occurred due to rash
and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its
driver.
The deceased was aged 24 years at the time of
the accident. He was a MBA Student at IBMR
International College, Koramangala. The claimant has
produced SSLC Marks Car as per Ex.P.10 and BBM
Marks Cards as per Ex.P.11. Since the deceased was
a brilliant student and he has a bright future
prospects, considering his academic qualification, I am
of the opinion that the monthly income of the
deceased can be assessed Rs.14,000/-. To the
aforesaid amount, 40% has to be added on account of
future prospects in view of the law laid down by the
Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in 'PRANAY
SETHI' (supra). Thus, the monthly income comes to
Rs.19,600/-. Since the deceased was a bachelor at
the time of the accident, it is appropriate to deduct
50% of the income of the deceased towards personal
expenses. Thus, the monthly income comes to
Rs.9,800/-. The deceased was aged about 24 years at
the time of the accident and multiplier applicable to
his age group is '18'. Thus, the claimants are entitled
to compensation of Rs.21,16,800/- (Rs.9,800*18*12)
on account of 'loss of dependency'.
In addition, the claimants are entitled to
Rs.15,000/- on account of 'loss of estate' and
Rs.15,000/- on account of 'funeral expenses'.
In view of the law laid down by the Supreme
Court in the case of 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE'
(supra), claimant is the father of the deceased, is
entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the
head 'loss of filial consortium' .
10. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the
following compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 21,16,800
Funeral expenses 15,000
Loss of estate 15,000
Loss of Filial consortium 40,000
Total 21,86,800
11. In the result, the appeals are disposed of.
The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
The claimant is entitled to a total compensation
of Rs.21,86,800/-.
In view of judgment of the Division Bench of this
Court in the case of 'MS.JOYEETA BOSE', the interest
awarded by the Tribunal at 9% is scale down to 6%.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest at 6%
per annum. 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.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to
the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HA/-
