Karnataka High Court
Ubed Ahamad S/O Iqbal Ahmad vs Suresh Patil S/O ... on 24 February, 2022
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24 T H DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
M.F.A. No .103791/2018
C/W
M.F.A.No.103790/2018,
M.F.A.No.101308/2019 &
M.F.A.No.101309/2019 (MV)
IN M.F.A. No.103791/2018
B ETWEEN
SMT.RAJESHWARI W/O SURESH PAT IL,
AGED AB OU T: 39 YEARS,
OCC: TAILORING,
R/O: IIAH I COLONY, GANGAVATHI,
DIST: KOPPAL- 583227. .. APPELLANT
(B Y MISS. SOUB HAGY A VAKKU ND, FOR
SRI.Y.LAKSHMIKA NT REDDY, ADVOCAT E)
IN M.F.A.No.103790/2018
B ETWEEN
SURESH PATIL S/O DR.PAMPAMAHESHWARA
AGED AB OU T: 46 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTU RIST,
R/O: ILA HI COL ONY ,
GANGAVATHI,
DIST: KOPPAL- 583 227. ...APPELLANT
(B Y MISS. SOUB HAGY A VAKKU ND, FOR
SRI.Y.LAKSHMIKA NT REDDY, ADVOCAT E)
AND
1 . SANTHOSH S/O ASHARAM PATEL,
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
-2-
AGED AB OUT : 20 Y EARS,
OCC: RIDER OF MOTOR CYCLE
NEW HNDA ACT IVE BEARING CHESSIS
NO.ME4JF501LDT I39807,
R/O: C.B .S., COLO NY,
GANGAVATH I, DIS TRICT: KOPPAL.
2 . UB ED AHAMAD S/O IQB AL AHMAD
AGED AB OUT : 49 Y EARS,
OCC: OWNER OF MOT OR CYCLE
NEW HNDA ACT IVE BEARING CHESSIS
NO.ME4JF501LDT I39807 AND
PROPR IET OR OF VIGRO MOT ARS
AGENCIES PR IVAT E LIM ITED,
AT B ALLARI,
R/O: 519/2H, NEAR FIRE STATION INFANT RY
ROAD,
BALLARI, DIST: B ALLARI-583101.
3 . VISHA LAX I @ VIS HALA
W/O B ASAVARAJA B ERAGI,
AGED AB OUT : 39 Y EARS,
OCC: PU RCHASER AND POSSESSOR OF
MOTOR CYCLE NEW HNDA ACTIVE BEARING
CHESSIS NO.ME4J F501LDT I39 807,
R/O: MALLESHWA RA NAGAR, GANGAVATHI,
DIST: KOPPAL.
...COMMON RESPONDENTS
(IN MFA.NOS.103791/ 2018 &
103790/ 20 18)
(B Y SRI. MAHESH WODEY AR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2 SERVED; NOT IE T O R3 HELD SU FFICIENT)
THESE MISCELLAN EOU S FIRST AP PEALS ARE F IL ED
U NDER SECTION 173(1) OF MO TOR VEH ICLES ACT,
1988, AGA INST T HE JU DGMENT AND AWARD DAT ED
19. 06.2018 PASSED IN MVC Nos.531/2014 and 532/ 2014
RESPECTIVELY, ON T HE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIV IL
JU DGE AND MO TOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIB U NAL,
GANGAVATHI, PART LY ALLOWING T HE CLAIM PET IT ION
FOR COMPENSAT ION AND SEEK ING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
-3-
BETWEEN:
U BED AHAMAD S/O IQB AL AHMAD
AGED AB OU T: 50 YEARS,
OCC: OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE
NEW HONDA ACT IVE B EARING
CHASSIS NO.ME-4 JF 501LDT 139807
AND PROPR IET OR OF
VIGRO MOTARS AGENCIES
PR IVATE LTD AT BALLAR I,
R/O: 519/2 H, NEAR FIRE STAT ION
INFANTRY ROAD,
B ALLARI,
DIST: B ALLARI- 58 3201
(REP. BY GPA SRI.SHARANAB ASAWESHWARASWAMY)
... COMMON APPELLANT
(IN MFA NOS.101308/ 19 &
101309/ 2019)
(B Y SRI.SANTOSH B .MANE, ADVOCATE)
IN M.F.A.No.101308/2019
AND
1. SU RESH PATIL
S/O DR.PAMPAMAHESHWARA
AGED AB OUT : 47 Y EARS,
OCC: AGRICU LTU RIST,
R/O: ILA HI COLON Y,
GANGAVATH I,
DIST: KOPPAL- 583201.
2. SANTOSH S/O ASHRAM PATEL
AGED AB OUT : 20 Y EARS,
RIDER OF THE MO TOR CYCLE
NEW HONDA ACTIVE B EARING
CHASSIS NO.ME-4 J F 501LDT 139807
R/O: C.B .S. COLONY
GANGAVATH I,
DIST: KOPPAL- 583201.
3. VISHA LAX I @ VIS HALA
W/O B ASAVARAJ BERAGI
AGED AB OUT : 39 Y EARS,
R/O MALLESHWAR A NAGAR,
GANGAVATH I,
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
-4-
DIST: KOPPAL- 583201.
...RESPONDENTS
(B Y MISS. SOUB HAGY A VAKKU ND, FOR
SRI.Y.LAKSHMIKA NT REDDY, ADVOCAT E FOR R-1;
SRI.MAHESH WOD EYAR, ADV. FOR R-2;
R- 3 SERVED)
IN M.F.A.No.101309/2019
AND
1. SMT RAJESHWARI
W/O SURESH PAT IL
AGED AB OUT 39 YEARS
OCC: TAILORIN G
R/O ILA HI COLONY GANGAVAT HI
DIST: KOPPAL- 583 203.
2. SANTOSH S/O ASHRAM PATEL
AGED AB OUT : 20 Y EARS,
RIDER OF THE MO TOR CYCLE
NEW HONDA ACTIVE B EARING
CHASSIS NO.ME-4 J F 501LDT 139807
R/O: C.B .S. COLONY
GANGAVATH I,
DIST: KOPPAL- 583203.
2. VISHA LAX I @ VIS HALA
W/O B ASAVARAJ BERAGI
AGED AB OUT : 39 Y EARS,
R/O MALLESHWAR A NAGAR,
GANGAVATH I,
DIST: KOPPAL- 583203.
...RESPONDENTS
(B Y MISS. SOUB HAGY A VAKKU ND, FOR
SRI.Y.LAKSHMIKA NT REDDY, ADVOCAT E FOR R-1;
SRI.MAHESH WOD EYAR, ADV. FOR R-2;
R- 3 SERVED)
THESE MISCELLAN EOU S FIRST AP PEALS ARE F IL ED
U NDER SECTION 173(1) OF MO TOR VEH ICLES ACT,
1988, AGA INST T HE JU DGMENT AND AWARD DAT ED
19. 06.2018 PAS SED IN MVC NOS.532/ 2014 A ND
531/ 2014 ON T HE FILE OF THE S ENIOR CIV IL JUD GE
AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TR IB U NAL, GANGAVATHI,
AWARDING COMPENSAT ION OF ` 1,38,575/- AND
` 1,09,914/- RES PECTIVELY WITH INTEREST @ 6% PER
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
-5-
ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF PETIT ION T ILL
REALIZAT ION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR HEARING, TH IS
DAY THE COURT DEL IVERED THE FOL LOWING:
J U D G M E N T
These appeals are filed by the second
respondent/owner of the Hond a Activa Showroom
and claimants challeng ing the judgment and award
dated 19 t h June 2018 passed by the M.A.C.T.,
Gangavathi, in MVC Nos.532/2014 and 531/2014.
2. The parties to these appeals are referred
to by their rankings before the Tribunal for the
sake of convenience.
3. The brief facts of the case that would be
relevant for the purpose of disposal of these
appeals are:
On 09.03.2014 at about 11.00 a.m., when the
claimants before the Tribunal were proceeding in
their TVS Victor motor cycle bearing registration
No.KA-37/J-5354, a new Honda Activa motor cycle
bearing Chassis No.ME4JF501LDT139807, which
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
was driven in a rash and negligent manner by the
first respondent, who was a minor, dashed against
the motor cycle of the claimants and caused the
accident near Jayanagara Police Station. The
claimants, who were grievously injured in the said
accident, were immediately shifted to Gangavathi
Government Hospital for treatment and
thereafterwards they were shifted to a private
Orthopedic hospital at Gangavathi for further
treatment. It is under these circumstances, the
claimants had filed two separate claim petitions
under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988,
claiming compensation towards the injuries
suffered by them in the accident. In the said
petitions, the rider of the offending Honda Activa
motor cycle was arrayed as respondent No.1 and
the owner of the Honda Activa Showroom was
arrayed as respondent No.2 while the
purchaser/owner of the said motor cycle was
arrayed as respondent No.3. The said claim
petitions were partly allowed by the Tribunal and a
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
compensation of `1,38,575/- and `1,09,914/- was
awarded to the claimants in M.V.C.Nos.532/2014
and 531/2014 respectively with interest @ 6% per
annum from the date of petition till realization.
Respondent no.2, who is the owner of the Honda
Activa Showroom, was saddled with the liability to
pay the compensation. Being aggrieved by the
liability saddled on him, respondent No.2 has
preferred M.F.A.Nos.101308/2019 and
101309/2019 while the claimants have filed
M.F.A.Nos.103791/2018 and 103790/2018 seeking
enhancement of the compensation.
4. Learned counsel for the second respondent
submits that the offending Honda Activa motor
cycle was sold by the second respondent to the
third respondent after receiving the entire sale
consideration and the said vehicle was delivered to
her as on the date of accident. She had handed
over the vehicle to a minor, who has caused the
accident. He submits that the vehicle in question,
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
which was seized immediately after the accident,
was released in favour of the third respondent
before the jurisdictional court of Magistrate and
before the Magistrate court, she has executed an
indemnity bond wherein she has clearly admitted
that she had purchased the said vehicle and a
temporary registration No.KA-34/TW-8043 was
assigned to the said vehicle, but at the time of
accident, the temporary registration number was
not displayed in the motor cycle. He submits that
having regard to the admitted fact that the vehicle
in question was already purchased by the third
respondent after paying the entire sale
consideration, the Tribunal was not justified in
saddling the liability on the owner of the Honda
Activa Showroom to pay the compensation amount
to the claimants. He further submits that the
accident in question was caused solely due to rash
and negligent riding of the motor cycle by a minor
to whom the vehicle was handed over by the third
respondent and therefore, the Tribunal was not
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
justified in saddling the liability on the owner of
Honda Activa Showroom.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the
claimants submits that the vehicle in question had
no temporary registration number as on the date
of accident and therefore, without a temporary
registration number, the owner of the Showroom
could not have handed over the vehicle. She
submits that the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal to the claimants is on the lower side on
all heads, which needs enhancement and
accordingly prays to allow the appeals filed by the
claimants and dismiss the appeals filed by the
second respondent/owner of the Honda Activa
Showroom.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to
the rival arguments addressed on both sides and
also perused the material available on record.
7. The accident in question had occurred on
09.03.2014 at about 11.00 a.m. and admittedly,
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
- 10 -
the first respondent, who was a minor, was riding
the offending motor cycle bearing Chassis
No.ME4JF501LDT139807 at the time of the
accident. The jurisdictional Police have filed a
charge sheet for the offences punishable under
Sections 279, 337 and 338 of IPC and Section 3
read with Section 181 of IMV Act as against the
rider of the offending motor cycle. Respondent
No.2 had filed a written statement before the
Tribunal that he had already sold the offending
motor cycle to the third respondent after receiving
the entire sale consideration and therefore it was
the third respondent, who was the owner of the
offending motor cycle as on the date of the
accident. The third respondent though served
remained absent before the Tribunal and was
placed exparte. Even before this court, inspite of
service of notice, the third respondent has
remained absent.
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
- 11 -
8. Learned counsel for the second
respondent/owner of the Honda Activa Showroom
has relied upon Ex.P8, which is an indemnity bond
executed by the third respondent before the court
of jurisdictional Magistrate at the time of getting
the offending motor cycle released in her favour
after the accident in question, which would go to
show that she had clearly admitted that the
vehicle in question was purchased by her as on
the date of accident and the vehicle belonged to
her. She has also stated that the temporary
registration number was assigned to the said
vehicle as No.KA-34/TW-8043, but the said
number was not displayed in the motor cycle at
the time of accident and the offending vehicle
which was in her name was ridden by the first
respondent at the time of accident. This material
on record would clearly go to show that, it is not
in dispute that the third respondent was the owner
of the vehicle as on the date of accident and a
temporary registration number was assigned to
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
- 12 -
the offending vehicle as on the date of accident.
The second respondent has handed over the
possession of the offending vehicle to the third
respondent after having received the entire sale
consideration and thereafterwards it appears, the
third respondent had handed over the said vehicle
to a minor who has caused the accident.
Therefore, at any event, the second respondent
cannot be held guilty for the accident in question.
The Tribunal had saddled the liability to pay the
compensation amount on the second respondent
on the ground that the offending motor cycle was
handed over to the third respondent without there
being a temporary registration number which is
factually incorrect.
9. Under the circumstances, I am of the
considered view that the Tribunal had erred in
saddling the liability on the second respondent to
pay the compensation amount to the claimants.
Since the offending vehicle was purchased by the
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
- 13 -
third respondent from the second respondent as
on the date of accident and after receiving the
entire sale consideration since the second
respondent had handed over the possession of the
offending vehicle to the third respondent, who in
turn had permitted the first respondent/minor to
ride the said vehicle which had resulted in causing
the accident, the Tribunal ought to have saddled
the liability to pay the compensation on the third
respondent. Accordingly, I hold that the third
respondent, who is the owner of the offending
motor cycle bearing Chassis
No.ME4JF501LDT139807, liable to pay
compensation to the claimants.
10. The claimants have filed separate appeals
seeking enhancement of the compensation. The
claimant in M.V.C.No.532/2014 was aged about 42
years as on the date of accident. He had suffered
fracture of right temporal bone and fracture of left
tibia in addition to other simple injuries in the
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
- 14 -
accident in question. Ex.P7 is the wound
certificate of this claimant. The Doctor, who was
examined as PW-3, has deposed before the
Tribunal with regard to the injuries and also the
physical disability suffered by the claimant and he
has assessed the physical disability to the
particular limbs at 45%. The Tribunal taking into
consideration the nature of fracture has taken the
whole body physical disability at 5%, which is
reasonable. The accident is of the year 2014 and
therefore, the notional income of the claimant
ought to have been taken into consideration at
`7,500/- per month in view of the income chart
maintained by the Karnataka State Legal Services
Authority for the purpose of disposal of the motor
vehicle accident cases before the Lok Adalat.
The proper multiplier applicable would be '14'. In
the said event, the claimant would be entitled for
a sum of `63,000/- towards loss of future income
due to physical disability. The claimant is entitled
for a sum of `40,000/- towards pain and suffering
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
- 15 -
and `30,000/- towards loss of amenities in future
life. The claimant is also entitled for a sum of
`14,000/- towards loss of income during laid-up
period and `10,000/- towards incidental expenses.
In addition to the same, the claimant is entitled
for a sum of `40,175/- towards medical expenses.
In all, the claimant is entitled for a total
compensation of `1,97,175/- as against
`1,38,575/- awarded by the Tribunal.
11. The claimant in M.V.C.No.531/2014 was
aged about 35 years as on the date of accident.
She had suffered fracture of middle 1/3 r d clavicle
and fracture to lower 1/3 r d radius and other simple
injuries in the accident. The doctor/PW-3 has
assessed the disability of this claimant to the
particular limbs at 45% and the Tribunal taking
into consideration the nature of injuries has
rightly considered the whole body disability at 5%.
Even in the present case, the notional income of
the claimant is required to be taken into
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
- 16 -
consideration at `7,500/- per month and the
proper multiplier applicable is '16'. In the said
event, the claimant would be entitled for a sum of
`72,000/- towards loss of future income due to
physical disability. The claimant is entitled for a
sum of `40,000/- towards pain and suffering and
`30,000/- towards loss of amenities in future life.
The claimant is also entitled for a sum of
`14,000/- towards loss of income during laid-up
period and `10,000/- towards incidental expenses.
In addition to the same, she is entitled for a sum
of `18,300/- towards medical reimbursement.
Therefore, in all, the claimant is entitled for total
compensation of `1,84,300/- as against `
1,09,914/- awarded by the Tribunal.
12. The enhanced amount of compensation
shall carry interest @ 6% per annum from the
date of petition till realization in both the cases.
13. Since the third respondent is held liable
to pay the compensation to the claimants, she is
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
- 17 -
directed to deposit the compensation amount with
interest before the Tribunal within a period of six
weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of
this order.
14. The amount in deposit in
M.F.A.Nos.101308/2019 and 101309/2019 is
permitted to be withdrawn by the second
respondent/appellant herein.
15. The order passed by the Tribunal insofar
as it relates to disbursement and deposit, etc.,
shall remain unaltered and the same shall be
applicable even in respect of enhanced amount of
compensation.
Accordingly, M.F.A.No.103791/2018 and
103790/2018 filed by the claimants are partly
allowed. M.F.A.Nos.101308/2019 and
101309/2019 filed by the second respondent are
allowed. The impugned judgment and award
accordingly stands modified.
M.F.A.103791/2018 &
CONNECTED APPEALS
- 18 -
In view of disposal of the appeals, all pending
applications do not survive for consideration.
Hence, they stand disposed of.
SD/-
JUDGE
KNM/-
