Karnataka High Court
Sri. Krishnappa K M vs United India Ins Co Ltd on 21 June, 2022
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JUNE 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.8399 OF 2019(MV)
BETWEEN:
1. Sri. Krishnappa K.M.,
S/o Late Muniveera Naik,
Aged about 51 years.
2. Smt. Amaravathi,
W/o Krishnappa,
Aged about 48 years.
3. Venu K.,
S/o Krishnappa,
Aged about 20 years.
All are R/at:
Kuruburu Maylandlahalli,
Chinthamani,
Chikkaballapur Dist-563125. ... Appellants
(By Sri.Nithya V., Advocate for
Sri. Prakash M.H., Advocate)
AND:
1. United India Ins. Co. Ltd.,
TP Hub, 6th Floor,
Krushibhavan Building,
Hudson Circle,
Bangalore,
Rep. by its Manager.
2
2. Sri. Iqbal Ahemed,
S/o Abdul Kahalak,
Door No.1st B Main Road,
Sudhamanagar,
SHanthinagar,
Bangalore-560 027. ... Respondents
(By Sri.Poonacha M.U., Advocate for R1:
Notice to R2 is dispensed with)
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act,
against the Judgment and Award dated: 22.04.2019
passed in MVC No.6531/2017 on the file of the XXI ACMM,
and XXIII Additional Small Causes Judge, Bengaluru
(SCCH-25), partly allowing the claim petition for
compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.
This MFA, coming on for admission, this day, this
Court, 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 claimants being
aggrieved by the judgment dated 22.04.2019 passed
by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru City
(SCCH-25) in MVC No.6531/2017.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 29.06.2017 at about 12.30
p.m. the deceased Muali was proceeding in a
motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-40/EA-2427
from Bangalore to Kanakapura. When they eached
near Agara Cross, Kanakapura Main road, one Ashoka
Leyland bus bearing registrationNo.KA-51/7861 came
with high speed and in a rash and negligent manner
dashed against the motorcycle. As a result of the
aforesaid accident, the deceased sustained grievous
injuries and succumbed to the injuries on 07.07.2017.
3. The claimants filed a petition under Section
166 of the Act seeking compensation for the death of
the deceased along with interest.
4. On service of summons, the respondent
No. 1 appeared through counsel and filed written
statement in which the averments made in the
petition were denied. The age, occupation and income
of the deceased are denied. It was pleaded that the
petition itself is false and frivolous in the eye of law.
It was further pleaded that the driver of the offending
vehicle did not possess valid driving licence as on the
date of the accident. It was further pleaded that the
liability is subject to terms and conditions of the
policy. It was further pleaded that the quantum of
compensation claimed by the claimants is exorbitant.
Hence, they sought for dismissal of the petition.
The respondent No.2 did not appear before the
Tribunal inspite of service of notice and hence was
placed ex-parte.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,
the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter
recorded the evidence. The claimants, in order to
prove their case, examined claimant No.1 as PW-1
and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P14.
On behalf of respondents, one witness was examined
as RW-1 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.R1
to Ex.R2. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned
judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place
on account of rash and negligent driving of the
offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which,
the deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to the
injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimants
are entitled to a compensation of Rs.16,82,682/-
along with interest @ 8% p.a. and directed the
Insurance Company to deposit the compensation
amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, this
appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimants has
raised the following contentions:
Firstly, at the time of the accident the deceased
was aged about 21 years and has just completed B.E.
Course. He had a very good academic qualification
and he is very good opportunity to get good job with
good salary. The monthly income assessed by the
Tribunal at Rs.10,000/- is on the lower side. In
support of her contentions, she has relied on the
judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in MFA
No.294/2006 disposed of on 09.02.2010 wherein
this Court has assessed the income of the engineering
student at Rs.20,000/-. She has also relied on the
judgment of another Division Bench of this Court in
MFA No.9897/2008 disposed of on 10.11.2014
wherein in similar situation the notional income has
been considered as Rs.25,000/-.
Secondly, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. NANU RAM reported in
2018 ACJ 2782, each of the claimants are entitled
for compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head of
'loss of love and affection and consortium'.
Thirdly, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal under the conventional heads is on the lower
side. Hence, she prays for allowing the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for
the Insurance Company has raised the following
counter-contentions:
Firstly, even though the claimants claim that the
deceased had completed B.E. and he is very good at
studies, no document has been produced to show the
co-curricular achievement and academic achievements
of the deceased. In support of his contentions, he
relied on the judgment of a Division Bench of this
Court in MFA No.3469/2019 disposed of on
29.08.2019 wherein this Court after considering the
academic and co-curricular achievement of a student
of fourth semester has considered the notional income
as Rs.15,000/- per month. He has also relied on the
judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in MFA
No.7647/2016 disposed of on 17.12.2020
wherein for the death of an engineering student the
monthly income has been considered as Rs.8,500/-.
Therefore, he contended that in the case on hand,
after considering the evidence of the parties and the
materials available on record the Tribunal has rightly
considered Rs.10,000/- per month.
Secondly, on appreciation of oral and
documentary evidence and considering the age and
avocation of the deceased, the overall compensation
awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable.
Thirdly, in view of the law laid down by a
Division Bench of this Court in the case of
MS.JOYEETA BOSE AND OTHERS vs.
VENKATESHAN.V AND OTHERS (MFA 5896/2018
and connected matters disposed of on
24.8.2020), the rate of interest awarded by the
Tribunal at 8% p.a. is on the higher side. Hence, he
sought for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the judgment and award.
9. It is not in dispute that deceased Murali
died in the road traffic accident occurred due to rash
and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its
driver. It is also not in dispute that at the time of the
accident he was aged about 21 years and had just
completed B.E. degree. The claimants have produced
two marks cards of the deceased as per Exs.P10 and
P11. There is no other supporting document of the
academic and co-curricular achievement of the
deceased.
10. Considering the evidence of the parties and
the materials available on record I am of the opinion
that the monthly income of the deceased has to be
assessed as Rs.15,000/-. To the aforesaid income,
40% has to be added on account of future prospects
in view of the law laid down by the Constitution Bench
of the Supreme Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE
CO. LTD. vs. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS
reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157, 'PRANAY SETHI'.
Thus, the monthly income comes to Rs.21,000/-.
Since the deceased was a bachelor, it is appropriate to
deduct 50% of the income of the deceased towards
personal expenses and remaining amount, i.e.,
Rs.10,500/- has to be taken as his contribution to the
family. The deceased was aged about 21 years at the
time of the accident and multiplier applicable to his
age group is '18'. Thus, the claimants are entitled to
compensation of Rs.22,68,000/- (Rs.10,500*12*18)
on account of 'loss of dependency'.
In addition, the claimants are entitled to
compensation of Rs.15,000/- on account of 'loss of
estate' and compensation of Rs.15,000/- on account
of 'funeral expenses'.
In view of the law laid down by the Supreme
Court in the case of 'MAGMA GENERAL
INSURANCE' (supra), claimant Nos.1 and 2, parents
of the deceased are entitled for compensation of
Rs.40,000/- each under the head of 'loss of filial
consortium' and claimant No.3 is entitled to
Rs.40,000/- towards 'loss of love and affection'.
11. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the
following compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 2268,000
Funeral expenses 15,000
Loss of estate 15,000
Loss of Filial consortium 80,000
Loss of love and 40,000
affection
Total 24,18,000
12. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part.
The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
The claimants are entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.24,18,000/- as against
Rs.18,44,400/- awarded by the Tribunal.
In view of the law laid down by a Division Bench
of this Court in JOYEETA BOSE (supra) the
enhanced compensation carries interest @ 6% p.a.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest @ 8%
p.a. (interest @ 6% p.a. on the enhanced
compensation) from the date of filing of the claim
petition till the date of realization, within a period of
six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this
judgment.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Cm/-
