Karnataka High Court
The Manager vs Smt. Laxidevi W/O ... on 21 February, 2022
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21 S T DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
M.F.A. No.100274/2021
C/W
M.F.A.CROB No.100071/2021 (MV)
IN M.F.A. No.100274/2021
BET WEEN
THE MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INS URANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
DIV IS IONAL OFFICE, B ALLARI,
THROU GH ITS SR. DIV IS IONAL MANA GER.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. N.R.KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE)
AND
1 . SMT.LAX IDEVI,
W/O VIRAB HADRAGOU DA,
AGE: 43 YEARS,
OCC: HOU SEHOLD WORK.
2 . V. KALPANA @ JYOTI,
D/ O LATE VIRABHADRAGOUDA,
AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: NIL.
3 . NEELAMMA,
D/ O LATE VIRABHADRAGOUDA,
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: NIL.
4 . SHANTA D/O LATE VIRAB HADRAGOU DA,
AGE: 18 YEARS, OCC: NIL
RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 4 ARE
R/O. WARD NO.7, H.NO.156,
B ALLARAPPA COLONY, B ALLARI.
2
5 . SMT.HOT EL KAREAMMA,
W/O LATE SIDDAN AGOUDA,
AGE: 79 YEARS,
OCC: HOU SEHOLD WORK,
R/O. WARD NO.2,
NEAR HAMPAMA VANA TEMPLE,
INDIRA NAGAR, BADANAHATTI,
B ALLARI.
6 . IRA PPA HUGAR S/O SHIVA PPA,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: DRIVER,
R/O.NO.57, BLOCK NO.2,
SANDANKAL, Y ALAB URGA,
TQ: YALAB URGA,
DIST. KOPPAL.
7 . M/S. FRONTLINE CORP ORATION LIMITED,
NO.208, 1 S T FLOOR, KAMA 3 R D FL OOR,
SHAL IN B U ILDING, NEHRU B RIDGE CORNER,
ASHRAM ROAD, AAHB ANAD, GU JARAT.
(M/S.FRONTLINE CORPORATION L IMITED,
NO.208, 1 S T FLOOR, MADANAY AKAHALL I,
MADHURA POST, BENGALURU -560123).
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B .C.JNANAYYA SWAMI, ADVOCAT E FOR R1 TO R5;
R6 HELD SU FFICIENT; NOTICE T O R7 DISPENSED WITH )
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEA L IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEH ICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST
THE J UDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.07.2 020 PASS ED IN
MVC No.1276/ 2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PR INCIPAL S ENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JU DICIAL MAGISTRAT E AND
MEMBER, MOT OR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIB U NAL-III,
BALLARI, AWARD ING COMPENSATION OF ` 31,96,800/- WIT H
INT EREST AT 6% P.A. FROM T HE DATE OF PET IT ION T ILL
ITS REAL IZ ATION.
IN M.F.A.CROB No.100071/2021
BET WEEN
1 . SMT.LAKSHMIDEVI,
W/O VEERAB HADRAGOU DA,
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: HOU SE WIFE.
3
2 . V. KALPANA @ JYOTHI,
D/ O. LAT E VEERAB HADRAGOU DA,
AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTU RIST.
3 . NEELAMMA D/O LATE VEERAB HADRAGOU DA,
AGE: 22 YEARS.
4 . KUMARI SHANTA,
D/ O LATE VEERABHADRAGOUDA,
AGE: 18 YEARS.
APPELLANT NO.1 T O 4 ARE
R/O: WARD NO.7, H.NO.156,
B ALLARAPPA COLONY, B ALLARI,
B ALLARI-583101.
5 . SMT.HOT EL KAREMMA,
W/O. LATE SIDDA NAGOU DA,
AGE: 80 YEARS, OCC: HOU SEHOLD,
R/O: WARD NO.2,
NEAR HAMPAMAVANA TEMPLE,
INDIRA NAGAR, BADANAHATTI,
B ALLARI AT B ALLARI- 583101.
...CROSS OB JECTORS
(BY SRI. B .C.JNANAYYA SWAMI, ADVOCAT E)
AND
1 . ERAPPA HU GAR S/ O SHIVA PPA,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: DRIVER OF LOR R Y
B EARING REG.NO. KA-04/A- 7461,
R/O. NO.57, B LOCK NO.02, SANGANKAL,
YALBU RGA TALU K,
DIST: KOPPAL 583231.
2 . M/S FRONT LINE CORPORATION LIMITED,
NO.208, 1 S T FLOOR, 4 T H FLOOR,
SHAL IN B U ILDING,
NEHRU BRIDGE CORNER, ASHRAM ROAD,
AHDAMAD-GU JRAT,
(M/S FRONT LINE
CORPORAT ION LT D., NO.208, 1 S T FLOOR,
MAADANAY AKAHALLI MADURA POST,
B ENGALU RU-560123).
4
3 . THE MANAGER,
U NIT ED INSU RANCE COMPANY LIMIT ED,
B ALLARI-583101.
...RESP ONDENTS
(BY SRI. N.R.KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS M.F.A. CROB IN M.F.A.No.100274/ 20 21 IS FILED
UNDER ORDER 41 RU LE 22 OF C.P.C., AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.0 7.202 0 PASS ED IN MVC
No.1276/ 2016 ON THE FILE OF T HE PR INCIPAL S ENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JU DICIAL MAGISTRAT E AND
MEMBER, MOT OR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIB U NAL-III,
BALLARI, PA RT LY ALL OWING THE CLAIM PETIT ION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL AND CROSS-OB JECTION COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal and cross objection are filed by the
insurer of the offend ing lorry bearing registration
No.KA-04/A-7461 and the claimant respectively
challenging the judgment and award d ated 01.07.2020
passed by the Princip al Senior Civil Judge and C.J.M.
and M.A.C.T-III, Ballari (hereinafter referred to as the
'Tribunal' for brevity), in MVC No.1276/2016,
questioning the quantum of compensation award ed by
the Tribunal.
2. Though this appeal and cross objection are
listed for orders, with the consent of the learned
counsels appearing for the parties, the same are
taken up for final disposal.
3. The parties are referred to by their
rankings before the Tribunal for the purpose of
convenience.
4. Brief facts of the case that would be
relevant for the purpose of disposal of this appeal
and cross objection are:
On 16.04.2016 at about 2.00 p.m., the deceased
Veerabhadragouda and his wife were proceeding in a
motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-34/X-3908 to
Siddapura for the purpose of distributing the
marriage card of their daughter and when they were
returning from Siddapura, the offending lorry bearing
registration No.KA- 04/A-7461 which was driven in a
rash and negligent manner by its driver, dashed
against the motorcycle in which d eceased was traveling
with his wife, at Gang avathi - Karatag i road , near
Ravinag ar, Gang avathi Taluk and caused the accident.
In the said accident, Veerab hadragoud a died and his
wife had suffered grievous injuries. It is under these
circumstances, the wife and children of deceased
Veerabhadragouda had filed claim petition under
Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for
short, the 'Act'), in MVC No.1276/2016 claiming
compensation against owner and insurer of the motor
cycle bearing registration No.KA- 04/A-7461. The said
claim petition was partly allowed and compensation
amount of `31,96,800/- with interest at 6% per annum
from the d ate of petition till realization was award ed by
the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent-insurer of the
offending lorry was directed to d eposit the
comp ensation amount before the Tribunal. Being
agg rieved by the quantum of compensation, the insurer
of the offending lorry as well as the claimants have
preferred this ap peal and cross objection.
5. Learned counsel for the insurer submits
that the deceased Veerabhadragouda was working as
a Clerk in Himalaya Kalava Agency and in addition to
the salaried income, he also had an income from his
business. The claimants had filed his income tax
returns for the year 2013-14 to 2016-17 and
subsequently on verification by the appellant-
Insurance Company, it is learnt that the income tax
returns filed for the year 2016-17 were concocted
documents. He therefore submits that no reliance can
be placed on the income tax returns filed for the year
2016-17. However he does not dispute the
genuineness of the income tax returns filed for the
earlier years.
6. Learned counsel for the claimants submits
that the Tribunal has not taken into consideration the
future prospects of the deceased and the
compensation awarded under the conventional heads
is also on the lower side and he therefore prays to
enhance the compensation amount and accordingly
dismiss the appeal filed by the insurer and allow the
cross-objection.
7. I have carefully considered the arguments
addressed on both sides and also perused the
material available on record.
8. The undisputed facts of the case are that
on 16.04.2016 in the road traffic accident which had
occurred as result of a rash and negligent driving of
the driver of the lorry bearing registration
No.KA- 04/A-7461, deceased Veerabhad ragouda who
had suffered g rievous injuries had succumbed to the
same. It is also not in dispute that the offending lorry
was d uly insured by the 3 r d respondent - Insurance
Comp any and the said policy was valid as on the date
of the accident. The only question that arises for
consid eration in these cases is with reg ard to the
adequacy of compensation award ed by the Tribunal to
the claimants who are wife and child ren of the
deceased Veerabhad ragoud a.
9. The d eceased Veerabhad ragouda was aged
about 42 years as on the date of accid ent. The income
tax returns for the year 2014-15 and 2015-16 are the
und isputed documents. For the assessment year
2015-16, the deceased Veerabhadragoud a had a total
income of `2,09,400/- after p ermissib le d eductions and
for the assessment year 2015-16, the deceased had
total income of `2,66,300/- after permissible
deductions. Therefore the averag e income for the
aforesaid two assessment years would be `2,37,850/-.
If the same is taken as the income of the d eceased for
the purpose of award ing compensation to the
claimants, 25% on the said income is required to be
taken into consideration towards loss of future
prosp ects of the deceased and the said event, the total
income would be `2,97,313/-, out of which 1/4 t h is
required to b e d educted toward s the personal exp enses
of the deceased. The applicable multiplier having
regard to the age of the deceased would be '14'. In the
said event, the claimants would be entitled for a
comp ensation of `31,21,790/- towards loss of
dependency. In addition to the same, the claimants are
also entitled for a comp ensation of `40,000/- each
towards loss of consortium and loss of love and
affection and they are also entitled for a comp ensation
of `30,000/- towards loss of estate and funeral
exp enses. Therefore the claimants are entitled for a
sum of `1,90,000/- under the conventional heads. In
all, the claimants are entitled for a total comp ensation
of `33,11,790/- as ag ainst `31,96,800/- award ed by
the Tribunal. The enhanced amount of compensation
shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of
petition till realization.
10. The insurer of the offending lorry who has
not d isputed, the liab ility is directed to d eposit the
balance compensation amount before Tribunal with
interest within a period of six weeks from the date of
receipt of certified copy of this order.
11. The amount in d eposit in MFA
No.100274/2021 is directed to be transferred to the
Tribunal for the purpose of disbursement. The ord er
passed by the Tribunal insofar as it relates to
apportionment, disbursement and deposit etc., remains
unaltered and shall be app licable even to the enhanced
amount of compensation. Accordingly the Miscellaneous
First Appeal filed by the insurer of the offending lorry
bearing registration No.KA- 04/A-7461 is dismissed
and the cross objection filed by the claimants is partly
allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
AC/ CL K
