Karnataka High Court
Dnyandev S/O Maruti Masal vs Abasaheb Mahadev Sul And Anr on 8 February, 2022
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar, K S Hemalekha
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA
MFA No.202451/2019
C/W
MFA No.202450/2019 (MV)
In MFA No.202451/2019:
BETWEEN:
Dnyandev S/o Maruti Masal,
Age: 43 years, Occ: Agriculturist,
R/o Masalwadi, Tq: Man,
Dist: Satara, Now R/o Honawad,
Tq. & Dist: Vijayapura-586101.
... Appellant
(By Sri Koujalagi Chandrakant Laxman, Advocate)
AND:
1. Abasaheb Mahadev Sul,
Age: Major, Occ: Owner of Jeep
No.MH-12/BP-7327,
R/o Jalbavi, Tq: Malasiras,
Dist: Solapur-411107 (Maharstra)
2
2. The Branch Manager,
Bharati Axa General Insurance Company Limited,
Pearl Complex Near B.K.Gudadinni Hospital,
Managuli road, Dist: Vijayapura-586101.
... Respondents
(Sri. C.S. Kalburgi, Advocate for R2;
Notice to R1 is dispensed with)
This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section
173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, praying to modify the
judgment and award dated 31.07.2019 passed in MVC
No.1230/2016 on the file of the Court of the Principal
Senior Civil Judge and Member of Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal No.V, Vijayapur and allow the appeal to grant the
compensation amount of Rs.17,40,000/- only as claimed
by the appellant before this Court and etc.
In MFA No.202450/2019:
BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Bayadabai W/o Sadashiv Masal,
Age: 51 years, Occ: Household work,
2. Smt. Parubai W/o Maruti Masal,
Age: 78 years, Occ: Nil,
Both are R/o Masalwadi, Tq. Satara,
Now R/o Honwad,
Tq: Dist: Vijayapur-586101.
... Appellants
(By Sri Koujalagi Chandrakant Laxman, Advocate)
AND:
1. Abasaheb Mahadev Sul,
Age: Major, Occ: Owner of Jeep
No.MH-12/BP-7327,
3
R/o Jalbavi, Tq: Malasiras,
Dist: Solapur-411107 (Maharstra)
2. The Branch Manager,
Bharati Axa General Insurance Company Limited,
Pearl Complex Near B.K.Gudadinni Hospital,
Managuli road, Dist: Vijayapura-586101.
... Respondents
(Sri. C.S. Kalburgi, Advocate for R2;
Notice to R1 is dispensed with)
This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section
173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, praying to modify the
judgment and award dated 31.07.2019 passed in MVC
No.1158/2016 on the file of the Court of the Principal
Senior Civil Judge and Member of Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal No.V, Vijayapur and allow the appeal to grant the
compensation amount of Rs.27,25,912/- only as claimed
by the appellant before this Court and etc.
These appeals coming on for admission this day,
K.S. Hemalekha J., delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
Though the matter is listed for admission, with the
consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is
taken up for final disposal.
2. MFA No.202451/2019 is filed by the claimant
in MVC No.1230/2016, seeking enhancement of
compensation by assailing the judgment and award dated
31.07.2019 passed by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM
and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.V, Vijayapur
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short).
3. MFA No.202450/2019 is filed by the claimants
in MVC No.1158/2016, seeking enhancement of
compensation by assailing the judgment and award dated
31.07.2019 passed by the Tribunal
4. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall
be referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.
5. Though different claim petitions have been
filed arising out of the accident that occurred on
24.04.2016 wherein one Sadashiv S/o Maruti Masal died
and one Dnyanadev, the brother of the deceased sustained
grievous injuries, it is the contention of the claimants in
both the claim petitions that on 24.04.2016 when
deceased Sadashiv along with his brother Dnyanadev was
proceeding from Pelvi, Tq: Malashiras to Chandapuri
village on motorcycle bearing Reg.No.MH-11/BG-1490, at
that time, one jeep bearing Reg. No.MH-12/BP-7327 came
from back side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed
against the motorcycle. As a result, the rider and the
pillion rider i.e., deceased Sadashiv and his brother
Dnyanadev suffered grievous injuries and deceased
Sadashiv succumbed to the said injuries in the hospital.
6. The wife and mother of the deceased Sadashiv
Masal, who died in a fatal road traffic accident filed MVC
No.1158/2016, seeking compensation contending that the
deceased was hale and healthy, aged about 52 years at
the time of accident and earning around Rs.9,000/- per
month and the claimants were solely depending upon the
income of the deceased.
7. The injured, who is the brother of the deceased
filed MVC No.1230/2016 for the injuries sustained by him
in the very same accident contending that due to the
injuries sustained, he suffered permanent disability and as
such, sought for compensation.
8. On issuance of notice by the Tribunal,
respondent Nos.1 and 2 appeared and filed their written
statement.
9. Respondent No.1 contended that the driver of
the jeep was not holding valid and effective driving licence
as on the date of the accident and the accident occurred
due to the rash and negligent riding of the deceased. It is
further contended that the jeep did not possess valid
fitness and permit on the date of the accident.
10. Inter alia, respondent No.2-insurance company
disputed the issuance of policy and the occurrence of the
accident due to the negligence on the part of the driver of
the jeep. It is contended that the alleged accident occurred
due to the negligence on the part of the rider of the
motorcycle and sought to dismiss the claim petition.
11. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,
the Tribunal framed the following:
ISSUES in MVC No.1158/2016
1. Whether the petitioners prove that the
deceased Sadashiv S/o Maruti Masal died in
the motor vehicle accident on account of rash
and negligent driving of the driver of Jeep
bearing No.MH-12/BP-7327 which occurred on
24.04.2016 at about 16.30 hours on Pelvi to
Chandapuri road Chandapuri Malashiras?
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for the
compensation? If so? To what extent and
from whom they are entitled?
3. What order?
ISSUES in MVC No.1230/2016
1. Whether the petitioners prove that he has
sustained injuries in the Motor vehicle
accident on account of rash and negligent
driving of the driver of Jeep bearing No.MH-
12/BP-7327 which occurred on 24.04.2016 at
about 16.30 hours on Pelvi to Chandapuri
road Chandapuri Malashiras?
2. Whether the petitioner proves that, he is
entitled for the compensation? If so? To
what extent and from whom they are
entitled?
3. What order?
12. In order to substantiate their case, claimant
No.1 in MVC No.1158/2016, the wife of deceased Sadashiv
examined herself as PW.1 and the claimant in MVC
No.1230/2016 examined himself as PW.2 and got marked
Exs.P1 to Ex.P14. On the other hand, respondent No.2-
Insruance Company examined its official as RW.1 and got
marked Exs.R1 to R4.
13. On the basis of the pleadings, evidence and
marital on record, the Tribunal passed the common
judgment and award in both MVC No.1158/2016 and MVC
No.1230/2016 and held that the accident occurred due to
the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the jeep
bearing Reg. No.MH-12/BP-7327 and awarded
compensation of Rs.7,74,088/- to the claimants in MVC
No.1158/2016 and Rs.60,000/- to the claimant in MVC
No.1230/2016 with interest at 6% per annum from the
date of petition till realisation.
14. The claimants, not being satisfied with the
quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in both
the petitions have preferred these appeals.
15. Heard the learned counsel for the
appellants/claimants and learned counsel for respondent
No.2- Insurance Company and perused the material on
record.
16. In MFA No.202451/2019 which is filed by the
claimant and being the case of injury, Sri. Koujalagi
Chandrakant Laxman, learned counsel for the appellant
would contend that the Tribunal has erred in awarding a
meager sum of Rs.60,000/- as against the claim of
Rs.18,00,000/- without considering the grievous injuries
sustained by the claimant which would be clear from
Ex.P11-wound certificate. It is also contended that while
awarding compensation towards pain and suffering, loss of
future prospect as per Ex.P7 and Ex.P11 is not considered
by the Tribunal.
17. In MFA No.202450/2019 which is filed by the
dependents of deceased Sadashiv in MVC No.1158/2016, it
is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants
Sri. Koujalagi Chandrakant Laxman that the loss of
dependency arrived at by the Tribunal is without
considering the earnings of the deceased as on the date of
the accident. The Tribunal has not awarded any
compensation towards loss of love and affection and thus,
sought to enhance the compensation.
18. Per contra, Sri C.S. Kalburgi, learned counsel
for respondent No.2-Insurance Company in both the
appeals would contend that, insofar as injuries sustained
by the claimant in MVC No.1230/2016 is concerned, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher
side looking into the injuries suffered by the claimant and
insofar as MVC No.1158/2006 is concerned, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper
and the manner in which the Tribunal has assessed the
compensation would not call for any interference.
19. Having heard the learned counsel for the
parties, the following points would arise for consideration
in these appeals:
1. Whether the judgment and award passed
by the Tribunal in MVC No.1230/2016
requires interference.
2. Whether the judgment and award passed
by the Tribunal in MVC No.1158/2016
requires interference.
20. The fact that deceased Sadashiv succumbed to
the injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accident that
occurred on 24.04.2016 due to the rash and negligent
driving of the jeep bearing Reg.No.MH-12/BP-7327 and the
pillion rider by name Dnyanadev, who is the brother of
deceased suffered grievous injuries in the said accident are
not in dispute. However, the controversy is only with
regard to the quantum of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal.
Point No.1:
21. MFA No.202451/2019 is preferred by the
injured claimant for the injuries sustained by him in a road
traffic accident. The Tribunal, considering Exs.P7 and P11 -
wound certificates of the claimant and the evidence of
PW.1 has held that the claimant has sustained three
grievous injuries and two simple injuries and considering
the age, income and disability suffered by the claimant and
taking into consideration the monthly income of the
claimant has awarded Rs.30,000/- towards pain and
suffering, Rs.20,000/- towards hospitalization charges and
medical expenses and Rs.10,000/- towards food,
nourishment and conveyance charges. In all, the Tribunal
has awarded compensation of Rs.60,000/- with interest at
6% p.a. holding that there is no permanent disability to
the claimant, as the claimant did not examine the doctor,
who treated him and issued the disability certificate.
Thus, looking into the judgment of the Tribunal and the
material on record, we are of the considered opinion that
there is no scope for enhancement of compensation in MFA
No.202451/2019 arising out of MVC No.1230/2016 and in
the fact and circumstances of the present case, the
judgment and award passed by the Tribunal does not call
for any interference. However, looking into the nature of
injuries, we deem it just and proper to award a global
compensation of Rs.50,000/- with interest at 6% per
annum from the date of petition till realization apart from
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. In view of the
above, we answer point No.1 in the affirmative, awarding a
global compensation of Rs.50,000/- with interest at 6%
per annum.
Point No.2
22. MFA No.202450/2019 is preferred by the
claimants in MVC No.1158/2016, seeking enhancement of
compensation on account of death of deceased Sadashiv,
who died in a fatal road traffic accident. The Tribunal has
taken the income of the deceased at Rs.8,000/- per
month. However, as per the guidelines of Karnataka State
Legal Service Authority, for the accidents occurred in the
year 2016, when there are no documents produced by the
claimants to show the actual income of the deceased, the
notional income is to be taken at Rs.8,750/-. Hence, taking
the notional income of the deceased at Rs.8,750/- per
month and adding 10% i.e., Rs.875/- towards future
prospects as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court
in National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay
Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, the
total income of the deceased would be Rs.9,625/- per
month. After deducting 1/3rd of it towards personal
expenses of the deceased and applying the multiplier of
11, the total compensation payable towards loss of
dependency would come to Rs.8,47,000 (Rs.9,625 x 12 x
11 x 2/3).
23. In view of the dictum of the Honble Apex
Court in Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur & Ors. v.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. reported in AIR 2020
SC 3076 and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs.
Nanu Ram reported in 2018 ACJ 2782, the appellants
would be entitled for a sum of Rs.40,000/- each i.e.,
Rs.80,000/- towards loss of spousal and filial consortium.
Further, the appellants are entitled for a sum of
Rs.80,000/- towards loss of love and affection,
Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.15,000/-
towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses.
24. Thus, the appellants in MFA No.202450/2019
are entitled for total compensation under various heads as
under:
1. Towards loss of dependency Rs.8,47,000/-
2. Towards loss of spousal and Rs.80,000/-
filial consortium
3. Towards loss of love and Rs.80,000/-
affection
4. Towards loss of estate Rs.15,000/-
5. Towards transportation of Rs.15,000/-
dead body and funeral
expenses
Total Rs.10,37,000/-
25. Since, the Tribunal has awarded a
compensation of Rs.7,74,088/-, after deducting the same,
the appellants are entitled for enhanced compensation of
Rs.2,62,912/- (Rs.10,37,000/- less Rs.7,74,088/-) with
interest at rate of 6% per annum. Accordingly, point No.2
is answered in the affirmative.
26. In the result, we pass the following
ORDER
i) MFA No.202451/2019 is allowed in part. The
appellant/claimant is entitled for a global
compensation of Rs.50,000/- with interest at
6% per annum from the date of petition till its
realization in addition to the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal.
ii) MFA No.202450/2019 is allowed in part. The
appellants/claimants are entitled for enhanced
compensation of Rs.2,62,912/- with interest at
6% per annum from the date of petition till its
realization.
iii) The judgment and award dated 31.07.2019
passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.1158/2016
and MVC No.1230/2016 is hereby modified to
the above extent.
iv) The enhanced compensation of Rs.50,000/-
awarded in MFA No.202451/2019 shall be
released in favour of the appellant.
v) The apportionment, deposit and release of the
enhanced compensation in MFA
No.202450/2019 would be as per the award of
the Tribunal.
vi) Respondent No.2-insurance company shall
deposit the enhanced compensation with
updated interest within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt of a certified copy of
this judgment.
vii) Parties to bear their respective costs.
viii) Registry is directed to send back the Trial
Court records to the Tribunal forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
SMP/LG
