Karnataka High Court

National Insurance Co Ltd vs Smt. Gowramma on 4 January, 2021

Author: S.Sujatha And M.I.Arun

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

                       PRESENT

        THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA

                         AND

          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

              MFA NO.3089 OF 2018 (MV)
                        C/W
              MFA CROB NO.105 OF 2019

IN MFA NO.3089 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
HASSAN BRANCH
MANJUNATHAESHWARA COMPLEX
BUS STAND ROAD, HASSAN
THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE
# 144, SUBHARAM COMPLEX
M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001
REP. BY ITS ADM. OFFICER
SMT. C. K. PARIMALA                   ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI.SEETHARAMA RAO B. C., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     SMT. GOWRAMMA
       AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
       W/O LATE D. G. NAVEEN

2.     KUM. AMRUTHA
       AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS
       SINCE MINOR
       REP. BY HER MOTHER AND
       NATURAL GUARDIAN, THE
       FIRST RESPONDENT HEREIN
                           2



3.   SRI. GANGADHARE GOWDA
     AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
     S/O DODDASIDDEGOWDA

4.   SMT. SUNDARAMMA
     AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
     W/O SRI. GANGADHARE GOWDA

     ALL ARE R/AT DEVAGONDAHALLI
     VILLAGE, LAKYA HOBLI
     CHIKKAMAGALUR TALUK-575 125

5.   SRI. MAHESH
     MAJOR IN AGE
     S/O BASAVARAJU
     R/O BHOOVANAHALLI VILLAGE
     HASSAN TALUK                    ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. K. R. LINGARAJU, ADV. FOR R1, R3 AND R4;
    R2 IS MINOR REP. BY R1; R5 SERVED)


     THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT        AND
AWARD DATED 03.11.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.396/2016
ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM,
MEMBER,    ADDITIONAL     MACT,    CHIKKAMAGALURU,
AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.17,85,000/- WITH
INTEREST AT 9% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
THE DATE OF PAYMENT.

IN MFA CROB NO.105 OF 2019

BETWEEN:

1.   SMT. GOWRAMMA
     W/O LATE D. G. NAVEEN
     HOUSEWIFE
     AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS

2.   BABY AMRUTHA
     AGED ABOUT 4½ YEARS
                               3


       SINCE MINOR, REP. BY
       HER MOHTER NATURAL
       GUARDIAN CROSS
       OBJECTOR NO.1

3.     SRI. GANGADHAREGOWDA
       S/O DODDASIDDEGOWDA
       AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

4.     SMT. SUNDARAMMA
       W/O GANGADHAREGOWDA
       AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
       ALL ARE R/AT DEVAGONDAHALLI
       VILLAGE AND POST, LAKYA HOBLI
       CHIKKAMAGLUR TALUK
                                 ... CROSS OBJECTORS

(BY SRI.K. R. LINGARAJU, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     SRI. MAHESH
       S/O BASAVARAJU
       AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
       R/AT BHOOVANAHALLI VILLAGE
       HASSAN TALUK & DISTRICT

2.     NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
       HASSAN BRANCH
       MANJUNATHESHWARA COMPLEX
       BUS STAND ROAD, HASSAN
                                     ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. B. C. SEETHARAMA RAO, ADV. FOR R2;
    NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)


      THIS MFA CROB IN MFA NO.3089 OF 2018 IS FILED
UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC READ WITH SECTION
173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 03.11.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.396/2016 ON THE
FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MEMBER,
MACT, CHIKKAMAGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
                                        4


PETITION  FOR    COMPENSATION                       AND      SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

     THESE MFA AND MFA CROB. ARE COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY, M.I.ARUN J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

                              JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the judgment and award dated

03.11.2017 passed in MVC No.396/2016 by the Principal

Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Member, MACT, Chikkamagaluru

(for short 'the Tribunal'), respondent no.2-Insurance

Company has preferred MFA No.3089/2018 and the

petitioners therein have preferred MFA.CROB.105/2019.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred

to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

3. The brief facts of the case are that on 08/09.02.2015,

at about 12.00 in the midnight, the deceased D.G.Naveen

was proceeding on the motorcycle bearing registration

No.KA 18 U 5762 as a pillion rider along with one

Kavyananda at Devagondanahalli village. They stopped the

vehicle by the side of the road and were talking with one

Yogeesha. At that time, a Car bearing No.KA 18 M 9727

being driven in a rash and negligent manner by respondent

no.1 came and dashed against the motorcycle because of

which the deceased Naveen sustained grievous injuries and

succumbed to the same. The petitioners are the wife,

daughter, father and mother of the deceased Naveen. They

preferred MVC No.396/2016 before the Tribunal.

4. Respondent no.1 is the driver and owner of the

offending car. Respondent no.2 is the Insurance Company.

After service of notice, both the respondents have appeared

before the Tribunal, filed the written statements and denied

the liability. To prove the case, two witnesses were

examined on behalf of the petitioners and they got marked

Exs.P1 to P16. The respondents examined one witness and

got marked Exs.R1 to R5.

5. Based on the pleadings and the evidence let in, the

Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.17,85,000/- to

the petitioners along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date

of petition till realization. Aggrieved by the same,

respondent no.2-Insurance Company has preferred MFA

No.3089/2018 and the petitioners have preferred

MFA.CROB.105/2019.

6. Respondent no.2-Insurance Company has appealed

on the grounds that there was contributory negligence on

the part of the rider of the motorcycle, that the Tribunal

erred in deducting 1/4th of the income towards personal

expenses of the deceased by ignoring the fact that the

father of the deceased being able bodied agriculturist is not

a dependent and it ought to have taken 2/3rd of the income

of the deceased towards loss of dependency. It is also

contended that the amounts awarded under the

conventional heads are also on the higher side and also the

interest of 9% p.a. is on the higher side.

7. Per contra, the petitioners have contended that the

Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased on the lower

side and have sought for enhancement of the

compensation.

8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and

perused the records.

9. The copy of the charge sheet and mahazar shows that

the negligence was on the part of the driver of the offending

Car. Insofar as the contention of the Insurance Company

that the father of the deceased who is petitioner No.3 is not

a dependent, we are in agreement with the same and the

Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/3rd of the income of the

deceased towards his personal expenses as against 1/4th.

In respect of conventional heads, we are of the opinion that

the Tribunal in fact has erred in not awarding the amounts

as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India

Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Somwati [(2020)9 SCC 644].

10. The accident occurred in the year 2015. The

deceased was aged 27 years at the time of the accident. He

was an agriculturist. No proof of income is provided by the

petitioners. Thus, the Tribunal has taken his income

notionally at Rs.8,000/- per month. It is noticed that as per

the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services

Authority in consultation with the Insurance Companies, the

notional income in the absence of proof of income is fixed at

Rs.9,000/- per month for the accident happened in the year

2015. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16

SCC 680, 40% has to be added to the income of the

deceased towards future prospects. The age of the

deceased being 27 years at the time of the accident as per

the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla

Verma vs. D.T.C [2009(6) SCC 121], a multiplier of 17

has to be adopted. Further, as there are three dependents

of the deceased, 1/3rd of the income has to be deducted

towards his personal expenses. Thus, the petitioners would

be entitled to a sum of Rs.17,13,600/- on the count of loss

of dependency [Rs.9,000/- + 40% = Rs.12,600/- X 12 X 17

X 2/3rd].

11. Under the conventional heads, the petitioners being

wife, daughter, father and mother, they are entitled to a

sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of consortium as per

the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in New

India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Somwati [(2020)9 SCC

644]. Thus, together they are entitled to a sum of

Rs.1,60,000/- towards loss of consortium. Further, they are

entitled to a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of estate and

funeral expenses. Thus, in all the petitioners are entitled to

a sum of Rs.19,03,600/- as against Rs.17,85,000/- awarded

by the Tribunal.

12. Awarding of interest being discretionary, the Tribunal

has awarded 9% interest per annum on the compensation.

We deem it not appropriate to interfere in the discretion

exercised by the Tribunal. However, presently there is a fall

in the interest rates awarded by banks and we deem it

appropriate to award interest @ 6% per annum on the

enhanced compensation.

13. Hence, the following:

ORDER

i) MFA No.3089 of 2018 and MFA CROB.105 of

2019 are allowed in part.

      ii)      The   total        compensation        awarded   by    the

               Tribunal      is     modified         and   enhanced    to

Rs.19,03,600/- (Rupees Nineteen Lakhs Three

Thousand and Six Hundred only) as against

Rs.17,85,000/- which shall carry interest at

the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the

claim petition till its realization.

iii) The portion of the order of the Tribunal

inasmuch as liability, apportionment and

disbursement remains intact.

iv) The insurance company shall deposit the

amount determined as aforesaid before the

Tribunal within 90 days from the date of

receipt of the certified copy of the judgment

and order.