Karnataka High Court
Smt. Lakshmamma vs Reliance General Insurance Co. ... on 31 May, 2022
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
M.F.A. No.4384 OF 2018 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
W/O LATE GANGAPPA,
2. SRI. MYLARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
S/O LATE GANGAPPA,
3. SRI. NEELAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
S/O LATE GANGAPPA,
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF
BASAVAPURA VILLAGE,
GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 105.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.NAGARAJA REDDY D., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
5TH FLOOR, CENRTARY BUILDING,
2
M G ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
2. SUDEEP J.,
MAJOR,
S/O JAGADEESHA,
ANK EXTENSION KOTE,
ARAKAIGUD,
HASSAN - 573 102.
3. SMT. LEELAVATHAMMA,
MAJOR,
W/O ESWARAIAH,
R/AT KACHAMACHENAHALLI,
GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 105.
4. SMT. SAVITHRAMMA,
MAJOR,
W/O GANGEGOWDA,
R/AT KACHAMACHENAHALLI,
GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 105.
5. SMT. SARASWATHAMMA,
MAJOR,
W/O. NARASIMHA MURTHY,
R/AT VEDALAVENI,
GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 105.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.H.N.KESHAVA PRASHANTH, ADV.,FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 TO R5 IS DISPENSED WITH)
3
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
02/06/2017, PASSED IN MVC NO.197/2015, ON THE
FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., MACT,
GOWRIBIDANUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE 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 02.06.2017 passed
by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gowribidanur
(hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in MVC
No.197/2015, whereby the Tribunal has granted a
compensation of Rs.2,82,000/- at the rate of 6% p.a.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 06.05.2015 at about
7.00 p.m., when the deceased was standing on the
footpath at SH-09 Road, near Basavapura Gate,
Gowribidanur Taluk, at that time Tata Maxi Cab
bearing No.KA-32-5996 driven by its driver at high
speed in a rash and negligent manner without
following any traffic rules dashed against the
deceased. Due to the impact, he sustained injury and
succumbed to the injury on 08.05.2015.
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, respondent Nos.1
and 2 appeared through their counsel and filed written
statement. Respondent Nos.3 to 5 have remained
absent and have been placed exparte. Respondent
No.1 has denied the petition averments and
contended that the offending vehicle was not involved
in the accident. There is a contributory negligence of
the deceased to the extent of 50%. Respondent No.2
has denied the averments made in the claim petition
and contended that the offending vehicle was insured
with respondent No.1.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,
the Claims Tribunal framed five issues and thereafter
recorded the evidence. The claimants, in order to
prove their case, examined PW.1 and they have
examined one more witness Sri.Nanjundappa as PW-2
and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to
Ex.P.17. The respondent neither examined any
witnesses nor marked any document. 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.2,82,000/- along with interest at the rate of
6% p.a. and directed the insurer to deposit the
compensation amount along with interest. Being
aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.
6. Sri Nagaraja Reddy.D, the learned counsel
for the claimants has raised the following contentions:
Firstly, the claimants' claim that the deceased
was aged about 65 years at the time of the accident
and he was earning Rs.15,000/- per month. The
Tribunal has considered the monthly income of the
deceased as Rs.4,000/- p.m., which is on the lower
side.
Secondly, as per the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD. -v- PRANAY SETHI AND
OTHERS [AIR 2017 SC 5157], the claimants are
entitled Rs.15,000/- for 'loss of estate', Rs.15,000/-
for 'funeral expenses'.
Thirdly, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD. -V- NANU RAM [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'. Hence, he prays
for allowing the appeal.
7. Per contra, Sri H.N.Keshava Prashanth, the
learned counsel for the Insurance Company has raised
the following counter-contentions:
Firstly, even though the claimants claim that the
deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, the
same is not established by the claimants by producing
documents. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly
assessed the income of the deceased notionally as
Rs.4,000/- 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.
Hence, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the records.
9. It is not in dispute that deceased -
Gangappa died in the road traffic accident occurred
due to rash and negligent driving of the offending
vehicle by its driver.
The claimants claim that the deceased was
earning Rs.15,000/- per month. But they have not
produced any documents to prove the income of the
deceased. In the absence of proof of income, the
notional income has to be assessed. As per the
guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal
Services Authority, for the accident taken place in the
year 2015, the notional income of the deceased has to
be taken at Rs.9,000/- p.m. The Tribunal has rightly
held that the deceased was aged about 65 years and
rightly deducted 1/4th of the income of the deceased
for personal expenses and multiplier applicable to his
age group is '7'. Thus, the claimants are entitled to
compensation of Rs.5,67,000/- (Rs.6,750 X 12 X 7)
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'. Claimant No.1, wife of the
deceased is entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/-
under the head of 'loss of spousal consortium'.
In view of the law laid down by the Supreme
Court in the case of 'MAGMA GENERAL
INSURANCE' (supra), claimant Nos.2 and 3, children
of the deceased are entitled for compensation of
Rs.40,000/- each under the head of 'loss of parental
consortium'.
10. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the
following compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 5,67,000/-
Funeral expenses 15,000/-
Loss of estate 15,000/-
Loss of spousal 40,000/-
consortium
Loss of Parental 80,000/-
consortium
Total 7,17,000/-
11. 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 7,17,000/- as against Rs.2,82,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest at
6% p.a. 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
SSB
