Karnataka High Court
United India Insurance Co.Ltd vs Sri.Putta Raju K K on 16 March, 2021
Author: Alok Aradhe Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
M.F.A. NO.5849 OF 2018 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD.,
VI FLOOR, KRISHI BHAVAN
HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU
REP. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER
MR. M.P. REVADI.
.... APPELLANT
(BY MR. ANUP SEETHARAMA RAO, ADV., FOR
MR. B.C. SEETHARAMA RAO, ADV.,)
AND:
1. SRI. PUTTA RAJU K K
S/O LATE KRISHNARAJ SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS.
2. SMT. MANJULA
W/O SRI PUTTA RAJU K K
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS.
3. SMT. MADHURA
D/O SRI PUTTA RAJU K K
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS.
ALL ARE RESIDING C/O KIRAN KUMAR C R
NO.72, II FLOOR, III CROSS
2
TEACHERS COLONY, KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT
BANGALORE-560078.
4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
VRL LOGISTICS LTD.,
NH-4, BANGALORE ROAD
VARURU, HUBLI.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY MRS. GOWHAR UNNISA, ADV., FOR
MR. V. VISWANATHA SETTY, ADV., FOR R1-R3
MR. ARAVIND M. NEGLUR, ADV., FOR R4)
---
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.04.2018 PASSED
IN MVC NO.2936/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST ADDITIONAL
SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-11),
AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.27,20,324/- WITH INTEREST
AT 8% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for short) has
been filed by the Insurance Company against the judgment
dated 09.04.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly
stated are that on 09.08.2014 at about 5 a.m., deceased
Manu Kumar was traveling in a bus bearing registration
No.KA-25 D-1400 which was being driven by its driver in a
rash and negligent manner and was proceeding from
Bangalore to Mumbai. Due to the rash and negligent driving
of the driver of the bus, the aforesaid bus met with an
accident and fell into a gutter. As a result of the aforesaid
accident, deceased Manu Kumar sustained injuries and
ultimately succumbed to the same on 10.02.2015 in
NIMHANS, Bangalore.
3. The claimants thereupon filed a petition under
Section 166 of the Act claiming compensation on the ground
that the accident had taken place solely on the rash and
negligent driving of the driver of the bus. It was further
pleaded that that the deceased was aged about 29 years at
the time of accident and was working as an Assistant Waiter
in a Cruise and was earning Rs.1,00,000/- p.m. Accordingly,
compensation to the tune of Rs.1,50,00,000/- along with
interest was claimed.
4. Respondent No.1 filed written statement in which
the averments made in the petition were denied. It was
pleaded that the accident took place in Satara District in the
State of Maharashtra and the mode and manner of the
accident was also denied. The age, avocation and income of
the deceased as well as the quantum of compensation was
also denied. Respondent No.2 filed statement of objections
in which similar stand was taken. However, it was admitted
that the Insurance policy was issued in respect of the vehicle
in question and was in force at the time of accident. It was
also pleaded that the driver of the bus did not have a valid
driving licence.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the
Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded
the evidence. The claimant No.2 examined herself as PW-1
and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P61. The
respondents did not adduce any oral or documentary
evidence. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment,
inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of
rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver. It was
further held, that the claimants are entitled compensation to
the tune of Rs.27,20,324/- along with interest at the rate of
8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. In
the aforesaid factual background, this appeal has been filed.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
Tribunal grossly erred in awarding Rs.2,50,000/- on account
of love and affection. It is further submitted that the interest
has been awarded at 8% which has to be 6%. On the other
hand, learned counsel for the claimants has supported the
judgment passed by the Claims Tribunal and submitted that
the amount awarded is just and proper and does not call for
any interference.
7. We have considered the submissions made by
learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.
The only question which arises for our consideration in this
appeal is with regard to the quantum of compensation. The
Supreme Court in 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO.
LTD. VS. NANU RAM & ORS.' (2018) 18 SCC 130, which
has been subsequently clarified by the Supreme Court in
'UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SATINDER
KAUR AND ORS.' AIR 2020 SC 3076 has held that each of
the claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- on
account of loss of consortium and loss love and affection.
8. In view of the aforesaid enunciation of law, we
restrict the compensation towards loss of love and affection
to Rs.1,20,000/- instead of Rs.2,50,000/-. Similarly, the
Tribunal has awarded interest in an accident which has taken
place in the year 2014, at the rate of 8% p.a. which should
have been granted at the rate of 6% p.a. Therefore, the rate
of interest is modified from 8% p.a. to 6% p.a.
To the aforesaid extent, the judgment passed by the
Claims Tribunal is modified.
Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Amount in deposit is transmitted to the Claims
Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
RV
