Karnataka High Court
The Manager vs Smt.Kashawwa W/O. Ramappa Patlur on 25 March, 2022
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
M.F.A.No.100459/2019 (MV)
C/W
M.F.A.No.100580 OF 2019
IN M.F.A.No.100459/2019
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGER
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
NEAR SANGOLI RAYANNA CIRCLE,
MUDHOL,
DIST:BAGALKOT.
REP:BY DULY CONSTITUTED AUTHORITY,
THE DEPUTY MANAGER,
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE,
UMANGALA COMPLEX,
HUBBALLI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. M K SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT.KASHAWWA W/O. RAMAPPA PATLUR
AGE:50 YEARS,
OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
Digitally signed
by J MAMATHA
J
MAMATHA
Location:
Dharwad
Date:
2. SMT SUMA W/O. MALLAPPA PATTENNAVAR
2022.03.31
10:45:06 +0530 AGE:34 YEARS,
OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
3. SMT GANGAWWA W/O. RACHAPPA BARAGI
AGE:32 YEARS,
OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
4. SRI BASAPPA S/O. RAMAPPA PATLUR
AGE:28 YEARS,
OCC:NIL,
-2-
MFA No. 100459 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 100580 of 2019
5. SRI SADASHIV S/O. RAMAPPA PATLUR
AGE:26 YEARS,
OCC:NIL,
6. SMT LAKKAWWA W/O. HANAMANT PATLUR
AGE:82 YEARS,
OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
ALL ARE R/O. BELAGALLI,
TAL:MUDHOL,
DIST:BAGALKOT-587301.
7. BHARATI ENGINEERING
ASHOKA BUILDCON LIMITED,
SAMABALAPUR,
BARAGAD ROAD PROJECT,
SAMBALAPUR,
ORRISSA STATE.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.GURURAJ R.TURAMARI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R6,
R7-NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.09.2019 PASSED
IN MVC NO.522/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XIV, MUDHOL, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF Rs.7,18,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM
THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.
IN M.F.A.No.100580/2019
BETWEEN
1. SMT.KASHAWWA W/O. RAMAPPA PETLUR,
AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
2. SMT. SUMA W/O. MALLAPPA PATTENNAVAR,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
3. SMT. GANGAWWA W/O RACHAPPA BARAGI,
AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
-3-
MFA No. 100459 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 100580 of 2019
4. SRI. BASAPPA S/O. RAMAPPA PETLUR,
AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
5. SRI. SADASHIVA S/O. RAMAPPA PETLUR,
AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
6. SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O. HANAMANT PETLUR,
AGE: 83 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
ALL ARE R/O: BELAGALI,
TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT - 587 313. .... APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI G.R.TURAMARI, ADV.)
AND
1. BHARATI ENGINEERING,
ASHOKA BUILDCON LIMITED,
SAMABALAPUR, BARAGAD ROAD
PROJECT, SAMBALAPUR,
ORISSA STATE.
2. THE MANAGER,
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
NEAR SANGOLLI RAYANNA CIRCLE,
MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT-587313. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI M.K.SOUDAGAR, ADV. FOR R2,
R-1 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.09.2018 PASSED
IN MVC NO.522/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XIV, MUDHOL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-4-
MFA No. 100459 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 100580 of 2019
JUDGMENT
In respect of an accident which occurred between a
motorcycle and a Bulldozer, in which the rider of the motorcycle
Hanamanth Petlur was killed, a claim petition was filed by his
wife, children and mother.
2. The Tribunal on assessing the evidence came to the
conclusion that the accident occurred due to the negligence on
the part of the driver of the Bulldozer. After assessing the
evidence regarding the earnings of the deceased, the Tribunal
proceeded to award the following sums:
Sl .
N o. H ea d s Am o unt
1 T ow ar ds los s of d ep e nd e nc y Rs . 6, 48 ,0 0 0 /-
2 T ow ar ds los s of est a t e Rs . 1 5 ,000 /-
3 T ow ar ds los s of c on so rt ium Rs . 4 0 ,000 /-
4 T ow ar ds f une ra l e x p ens es Rs . 1 5 ,000 /-
T ot al Rs . 7, 18, 00 0/ -
3. Shri M.K.Soudagar, learned counsel appearing for
the insurer as usual, strenuously contended that the accident
occurred at a place where construction work of the road was
going on and the rider of the motorcycle was not supposed to
utilize the said road and as a consequence, he was entirely
negligent and this was the real cause of the accident. He also
MFA No. 100459 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 100580 of 2019
submitted that the sum of Rs.9,000/- determined by the
Tribunal as the monthly income of the deceased was incorrect.
4. Learned counsel for the claimants, on the other
hand, contended that the road was not closed for traffic and the
accident occurred when the driver of the Bulldozer suddenly
brought his vehicle in reverse which resulted in collision. He
also submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in not
awarding future prospects and in not granting loss of
consortium to the wife, children and mother.
5. It is not in dispute that Hanmanth Petlur died as a
reason of the collision between the motorcycle and the
Bulldozer. The evidence on record also indicates that the
accident occurred when the Bulldozer suddenly came in a
reverse direction. The Tribunal has noticed that the police after
investigation had actually laid a charge-sheet against the driver
of the Bulldozer and this itself prima facie indicates that the
accident was due to the negligence on the part of the driver of
the Bulldozer. In the light of the charge-sheet that had been
laid and also the fact that the accident occurred when the
MFA No. 100459 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 100580 of 2019
Bulldozer was travelling in the reverse direction, it will have to
be held that the accident occurred only due to the negligence of
the driver of the Bulldozer.
6. The Tribunal has taken note of the fact that the
deceased was aged 60 years and in the year 2016, it was quite
probable that the claimant was earning a sum of Rs.9,000/-
p.m. As regards the monthly income, as per the income
determined by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, in
respect of the accident of the year 2016, the monthly income of
the victim is to be considered as Rs.8,750/- in the absence of
any documentary evidence. In my view, having regard to the
totality of the circumstances, the assessment of Rs.9,000/- per
month by the Tribunal, cannot be found fault with.
7. It is settled law that deceased being 60 years,
future prospects at the rate of 10% would have to be added
and this would result in the income of the deceased to be
computed at Rs.9,900/-.
8. The deceased had left behind him, his wife, two
married daughters, two sons aged 24 and 26 years apart from
MFA No. 100459 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 100580 of 2019
a mother. Having regard to the age of the sons, in my view, it
would be appropriate to deduct 1/3rd of the income which would
result in the monthly income of the deceased being Rs.6,600/-
(Rs.9,900 minus Rs.3,300 = 6,600/-).
9. The age of the deceased being 60 years, a
multiplier of 9 would have to be adopted. Consequently, the
claimants would be entitled to a sum of
Rs.6,600X12X9=7,12,800/-.
10. Apart from the above, the claimants being the wife,
daughters, sons and mother, each of them would be entitled to
a sum of Rs.44,000/- towards loss of consortium.
11. The claimants are also entitled to a sum of
Rs.33,000/- under the conventional head.
12. Hence, the claimants are entitled to the modified
award which reads as under:
Sl. Heads Modified Award
No.
1 Towards loss of income
(Rs.9,000+10%=Rs.9,900 less Rs. 7,12,800/-
1/3rd = Rs.6,600)
(6600X12X9)
2 Towards loss of consortium Rs. 2,64,000/-
(Rs.44,000X6)
3 Towards conventional heads Rs. 33,000/-
Total Rs. 10,09,800/-
MFA No. 100459 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 100580 of 2019
13. Thus, the claimants are entitled for total
compensation of Rs.10,09,800/- as against the sum of
Rs.7,18,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
14. It has to be stated here that since the Insurance
Company contends that the rider of the Bulldozer did not
possess a valid driving licence and despite the police calling
upon him to produce the licence, the same was not produced, it
would be appropriate to permit the Insurance Company to
apply the principle 'pay and recover'. Since the Insurer
contends that there is breach of policy conditions, it would be
appropriate to direct the Insurance Company to first satisfy the
compensation and thereafter, proceed to recover compensation
from the owner, if they are able to establish that the driver of
the Bulldozer did not possess a valid driving licence.
15. In view of the above, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) M.F.A.No.100459/2019 filed by the
Insurance Company is dismissed,
(ii) M.F.A.No.100580/2019 filed by the
claimants is allowed in part,
MFA No. 100459 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 100580 of 2019
(iii) The Judgment and Award dated 18.09.2018
passed in MVC No.522/2016, on the file of
the MACT-XIV, Mudhol, is hereby modified.
The claimants are entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.10,09,800/- as against
the sum of Rs.7,18,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal. The enhanced compensation of
Rs.2,91,800/- shall carry interest @ 6%
p.a. from the date of claim petition till the
date of deposit,
(iv) The Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the enhanced compensation after
deducting the compensation already paid
along with interest before the Tribunal
within a period of 90 days from the date of
receipt of certified copy of this judgment,
(v) The amount awarded shall be disbursed in
the same terms as that imposed by the
Tribunal.
(vi) The amount in deposit be transmitted to the
Tribunal for disbursement in accordance
with law.
(Sd/-)
JUDGE
Jm/-
