Karnataka High Court
Regional Manager vs Smt Noor Ayesha on 29 March, 2022
Bench: P S Kumar, Rajendra Badamikar
M.F.A No.8063/2015
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
M.F.A No.8063 OF 2015 (MV)
BETWEEN :
REGIONAL MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE, SUBHARAM
COMPLEX, 144, M.G.ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001 ... APPELLANT
(BY SHRI. A.N. KRISHNA SWAMY, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. SMT. NOOR AYESHA
W/O LATE MEHABOOB JAN
MAJOR
2. AMEERBANU
D/O LATE MEHABOOB JAN
NOW AGED AOBUT 15 YEARS
3. FARTHEEN BANU
D/O LATE MEHABOOB JAN,
NOW AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS
4. ROHASHA NAWAZ
D/O LATE MEHABOOB JAN
NOW AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS
M.F.A No.8063/2015
2
5. ZAMEER
S/O LATE MEHABOOB JAN
NOW AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 5 SINCE
MINORS, REPRESENTED BY THEIR
MOTHER/NATURAL GUARDIAN/
THE 1ST RESPONDENT HEREIN
ALL R/A C/O RAJESH
#63/1, ANCHEPALYA
KUMBALAGODU POST
KENGERI HOBLI
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK-560 052
6. BASAVARAJU R
S/O RANGAPPA
MAJOR
R/A NO.257, ANCHEPALYA VILLAGE
KUMBALAGODU POST
KENGERI HOBLI
BENGALURU-560 062
7. THE REGIONAL MANAGER
SOTUH INDIAN RAILWAY
HUBLI-560 0177 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5;
R6 & R7 - SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED10.06.2015 PASSED IN
MVC NO.1776/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI A.C.M.M &
XXIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, COURT OF THE
SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.16,05,250/- WITH INTEREST @ 6%
P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF
DEPOSIT.
THIS MFA, HAVING BEEN HEARD THROUGH VIDEO
CONFERENCING AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON
25.02.2022 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J,
PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:-
M.F.A No.8063/2015
3
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the Insurer challenging
the judgment and Award dated June 10, 2015 in
MVC No.1776/2012 on the file of XXI A.C.M.M. &
XXIII Additional Small Causes Judge, MACT,
Bengaluru.
2. Heard Shri. A.N.Krishna Swamy, learned
Advocate for the appellant and Shri. Shripad V.
Shastri, learned Advocate for respondents
No.1 to 5.
3. For the sake of convenience, parties
shall be referred as per their status before the
Tribunal.
4. The facts of the case are, on November
2, 2011, husband of first claimant Mehaboob Jan
was travelling in a Tipper lorry. It was driven in a
rash and negligent manner and dashed against a
M.F.A No.8063/2015
moving train. Mehaboob Jan sustained grievous
injuries and died on the spot. Claimants
filed their claim petition seeking compensation.
On consideration of material on record, Tribunal has
awarded Rs.16,05,250/-. Feeling aggrieved, Insurer
has filed this appeal.
5. Shri. Krishna Swamy, for the Insurer,
urged a pure question of law for consideration of
this Court, namely that Mehaboob Jan was working
as a cleaner, therefore, the provisions of
Employees' Compensation Act, 1923 ('Act' for
short) ought to have been applied in this case. He
has placed reliance on National Insurance Company
Ltd., Vs. Prembai Patel and others1.
6. Shri. Shripad Shastri argued in support
of the impugned judgment and prayed for dismissal
of the appeal.
2005 ACJ 1323 (SC) (para 15)
M.F.A No.8063/2015
7. We have carefully considered rival
contentions and perused the records.
8. Noor Ayesha, wife of the deceased has
been examined as P.W.1. She has stated in her
examination-in-chief that her husband was a
cleaner in the Tipper Lorry and earning Rs.300/-
per day with Rs.25/- as bata.
9. The Tribunal has held in para 12 of the
judgment that the owner and Insurer are jointly
and severally liable to pay the compensation.
10. Shri. Krishna Swamy has argued that in
a case of this nature, an employee shall be entitled
for compensation under the Employees'
Compensation Act. In case, the owner of the vehicle
wants the liability of the Insurer not to be restricted
under the said Act, but it should be more, then, he
must take such a policy by paying extra premium
M.F.A No.8063/2015
and such policy must contain a specific clause to
that effect.
11. In the case on hand, the admitted
position is, Mehaboob Jan was an employee,
working as a cleaner. Ex.R1 is the Insurance policy.
It does not show that any extra premium has been
paid. As per the Act, in case of death, the quantum
of compensation is required to be worked out as
prescribed in Schedule IV. It is recorded by the
Tribunal that Mehaboob Jan was aged 40 years.
Therefore, he shall be entitled for compensation at
184.17%, under Section 4 of the Act.
12. As per Section 4 of the Act, in case of
death, compensation payable shall be an amount
equivalent to 50% of the monthly wages multiplied
by relevant factor.
13. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view
M.F.A No.8063/2015
that Rs.8,000/- can be considered as notional
income of deceased. Shri. A.N.Krishna Swamy in his
fairness has not seriously contested this aspect.
The relevant factor applicable for a person aged 40
years is 184.17. Under Section 4A(3)(a) of the Act,
simple interest at the rate of 12% can be awarded.
The compensation is thus recomputed as follows:
14. Monthly notional income of the deceased
is considered as Rs.8,000/-. One half (50%) of the
same works out to Rs.4,000/-. The total
compensation, thus works out to Rs.7,36,680/-
(Rs.4,000*184.17).
15. In view of the above, following:
ORDER
(a) Appeal is allowed in part
modifying the judgment and award
passed by the Tribunal, holding that
claimants shall be entitled for a
M.F.A No.8063/2015
compensation of Rs.7,36,680/- with 12%
interest from the date of the claim
petition till the date of payment.
(b) The Insurer shall deposit the
amount, excluding the amount if any,
already deposited/paid, within six weeks
before the Tribunal.
(c) Disbursement of compensation shall
be as awarded by the Tribunal.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
SPS
