Karnataka High Court
M/S Reliance General Insurance ... vs Smt. Devi T. W/O. Late Adi Narayana on 24 March, 2022
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100387 OF 2021 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100932 OF 2021
IN M.F.A. NO.100387/2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BY ITS MANAGER
PARVATI NAGAR,
BALLARI-583105
REPTD BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. G. N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. DEVI T. W/O. LATE ADI NARAYANA
AGE. 40 YEARS,
OCC. HOUSE WIFE,
R/O. 17TH WARD,
WARD KANAKADAS NAGAR,
PATEL NAGAR, BALLARI-583109.
2. MR. NANDIVARDHAN T. S/O. LATE ADI NARAYANA
AGE. 22 YEARS,
OCC. STUDENT,
R/O. 17TH WARD,
-2-
MFA No. 100387 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100932 of 2021
WARD KANAKADAS NAGAR,
PATEL NAGAR, BALLARI-583109.
3. MR. NITHIN KUMAR T. S/O. LATE ADI NARAYANA
AGE. 20 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
R/O. 17TH WARD, WARD KANAKADAS NAGAR,
PATEL NAGAR, BALLARI-583109.
4. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O. LATE VENKATASWAMY
AGE. 67 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE HOLD,
R/O. 17TH WARD, WARD KANAKADAS NAGAR,
PATEL NAGAR, BALLARI-583109.
5. SATHISH MADOLI S/O. CHANNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
OCC. DRIVER OF THE
LORRY BEARING REG.
NO.KA-16/C-8708
R/O. H. NO.216, HAMALARA
PLOT NEAR SAI BABA TEMPLE,
GADAG-582103.
6. SAYED ABDUL S/O. SYED MUMTAZ
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
OCC. OWNER OF THE
LORRY BEARING REG.
NO.KA-16/C-8708
R/O. EDRIES MANZIL
BADAMKAN
CHITRADURGA-577502.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M. AMAREGOUDA, ADV. FOR R1 TO 4;
R5- NOTICE DISPENSED WITH;
R6- SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.07.2020 PASSED IN MVC
-3-
MFA No. 100387 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100932 of 2021
NO.435/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-V,
BALLARI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.23,79,600/- WITH
INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS
PAYMENT.
IN M.F.A. NO.100932/2021:
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. DEVI T. W/O. LATE ADI NARAYANA,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
2. MR. NANDIVARDHAN T. S/O. LATE ADI NARAYANA,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
3. MR. NITHIN KUMAR S/O. LATE ADI NARAYANA,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
4. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O. LATE VENKATASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT 17TH WARD,
KANAKADAS NAGAR, PATEL NAGAR,
BALLARI-583101.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. M. AMAREGOUDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SATHISH MADOLI S/O. CHANNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
OCC. DRIVER OF THE
LORRY BEARING REG.
NO.KA-16/C-8708
R/O. H. NO.216, HAMALARA
PLOT NEAR SAI BABA TEMPLE,
GADAG-582103.
-4-
MFA No. 100387 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100932 of 2021
2. SAYED ABDUL S/O. SYED MUMTAZ
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
OCC. OWNER OF THE
LORRY BEARING REG.
NO.KA-16/C-8708
R/O. EDRIES MANZIL
BADAMKAN
CHITRADURGA-577502.
3. M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
BY ITS MANAGER,
BALLARI-583101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G. N. RAICHUR, ADV. FOR R3;
R1- NOTICE DISPENSED WITH;
R2- HELD SUFFICIENT)
MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.07.2020 PASSED IN MVC
NO.435/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-V,
BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THIS COURT MADE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
M.F.A. No.100387/2021 is filed by the Insurance
Company challenging the quantum of compensation while
MFA No. 100387 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100932 of 2021
M.F.A. No.100932/2021 is filed by the appellants seeking
for enhancement.
2. The fact that Adi Narayana while walking on the
road was hit by the lorry on 02.01.2019, as a result of
which he suffered grievous injuries and died is not in
dispute. The fact that the offending lorry was insured is
also not in dispute.
3. The Tribunal has taken the view that Adi
Narayana was earning Rs.16,000/- per month and hence
the claimants were entitled to a sum of Rs.17,92,000/-
towards loss of dependency. The Tribunal has awarded a
total compensation amount of Rs.23,79,600/-.
4. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company
contends that the determination of income of Rs.16,000/-
cannot be accepted since, PW3 - the Account Manager of
the firm which was stated to have employed Adi Narayana
had deposed that he had not seen Adi Narayana at all. He
MFA No. 100387 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100932 of 2021
submitted that in such a situation, the monthly income
determined by the Karnataka State Legal Services
Authority, was requested to be adopted in respect of the
accidents, which for the year 2019 was Rs.13,250/-.
5. The learned counsel for the claimants on the
other hand contended that the sums awarded by the
Tribunal was just and proper.
6. Assuming that Ex.P.10 is a salary certificate,
which has been relied upon by the Tribunal cannot be
believed, the fact remains that Adi Narayana - the
deceased possessed a driving license to drive a
commercial vehicle i.e. LMV Cab and he had obtained this
license in the year 2000. In my view, even if Ex.P.10 is
disregarded, since the deceased possessed a license to
drive commercial vehicle it can be safely assume that he
was earning atleast sum of Rs.15,000/- per month.
7. The Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd of his income
on the ground that he had two major sons. The sons of
MFA No. 100387 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100932 of 2021
Adi Narayana i.e. claimant Nos. 2 and 3 were admittedly
aged 28 and 18 years respectively and they would
therefore obviously students. In that view of the matter
deduction of 1/3rd would be incorrect and deduction of
1/4th would be appropriate. To the said monthly income of
Rs.15,000/-, 25% is to be added to future prospectus and
out of the same it would be appropriate to deduct 1/4th
towards personal expenditure.
8. The deceased was aged 45 years and hence a
multiplier of 14 would have to be applied.
9. Thus the claimant would entitled to a sum of
Rs.23,62,584/- (i.e. Rs.14,063X14X12), towards loss of
dependency.
10. In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court
rendered in the case of National Insurance Company
Limited V. Pranay Sethi and others, reported in (2017)
16 SCC 680, the claimants would be entitled to a sum of
Rs.1,76,000/- towards loss of consortium and also be entitled
MFA No. 100387 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100932 of 2021
to Rs.33000/- (i.e. Rs.16,500X2) toward loss of future
prospectus.
11. Thus the claimants would entitled to a sum of
Rs.25,71,584/-.
12. The appeal filed by the Insurance Company
insofar as it relates to the finding regarding monthly
income of Adi Narayana is modified and it is held that the
deceased was earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month.
Since the loss of consortium and income under the
conventional heads has been awarded under the judgment
of the Apex Court and the amount that the claimants
would be entitled would still nevertheless stand increased
to Rs.25,71,584/-, though the appeal filed by the
Insurance Company is to be allowed in part only to the
extent of upsetting the finding regarding monthly income
of the deceased.
13. In view of the above, I pass the following:
MFA No. 100387 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100932 of 2021
ORDER
(i) The appeal filed by the Insurance Company is
hereby allowed in part only regarding the
finding pertains to salary, which stands
modified.
(ii) The Judgment and Award dated 14.07.2020
passed in MVC No.435/2019, on the file of the I
Addl. Senior Civil Judge and Member, MACT-V,
Ballari, is hereby modified. The claimant is
entitled to a total compensation of
Rs.25,71,584/- as against the sum of
Rs.23,79,600/- awarded by the Tribunal. The
enhanced compensation of Rs.1,91,984/- shall
carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of claim
petition till the date of deposit,
(iii) The Insurance Company/respondent is directed
to deposit the enhanced compensation after
deducting the compensation already paid along
- 10 -
MFA No. 100387 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100932 of 2021
with interest before the Tribunal within a period
of 90 days from the date of receipt of certified
copy of this judgment,
(iv) The amount awarded shall be disbursed in the
same terms as that imposed by the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SM M
