Karnataka High Court
The Branch Manager vs Mutanna And Ors on 30 August, 2023
Bench: Ravi V Byrvhj
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6877
MFA No. 200188 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200188 OF 2018 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
THE BRANCH MANAGER,
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
HANAMASHETTY BUILDING,
GURUKUL ROAD, VIJAYAPUR.
NOW REPRESENTED BY
THE CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER,
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
HUBBALI REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR,
KALABURGI BHADRAPUR INFINITY,
PINTO ROAD, HUBBALI-580 020.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SANJAY M. JOSHI, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed AND:
by SACHIN
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
1. MUTTANNA
KARNATAKA S/O SANGAPPA BADIGER,
AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
2. JAYASHREE W/O RAMACHANDRA
@ RAJASHEKHAR BADIGER,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: H.H.WORK,
3. GANESH S/O RAMACHANDRA
@ RAJASHEKHAR BADIGER,
AGE: 17 YEARS, M/G BY PTR.NO.2
4. MONESH S/O RAMACHANDRA
@ RAJASHEKHAR BADIGER,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6877
MFA No. 200188 of 2018
AGE: 16 YEARS, M/G BY PTR. NO.2,
ALL ARE R/O UTNAL,
TQ: DIST: VIJAYAPURA-586 101.
5. VITHALGOUDA S/O RUDRAPPA BIRADAR,
AGE:42 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O MANDRUP, TQ: SOUTH SOLAPUR,
DIST: SOLAPUR-413 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(R1 AND R2 ARE SERVED; R3 & R4 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED
BY R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO AWARD CALL FOR RECORDS IN
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.10.2017 IN MVC
NO.49/2016, ON THE FILE MEMBER MACT IV AND III
ADDL.DISTRICT JUDGE, VIJAYAPURA, INSOFAR AS THE
QUANTUM OF COMPENSATION UNDER CONVENTIONAL HEADS
EXCESSIVE BY Rs.2,70,000/- WITH INTEREST OF 6% AND SET
ASIDE THE SAID JUDGMENT AND AWARD INSOFARAS THE
LIABILITY IS SADDLED UPON THE APPELLANT INSURANCE
COMPANY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Challenging judgment and award dated 23.10.2017
passed by Member, MACT-IV and III Adll. District Judge,
Vijayapura (for short 'tribunal') insofar as MVC
no.49/2016, this appeal is filed
2. Shri Sanjay M.Joshi, learned counsel for
appellant submitted that appeal was by insurer on
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6877
MFA No. 200188 of 2018
quantum. It was submitted while awarding compensation,
tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.3,25,000/-
under conventional heads which was excessive and
contrary to decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of
National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi
and others1 and therefore sought for reduction.
3. Heard learned counsel for parties. Perused
impugned judgment and award.
4. From above submission and since insurer is in
appeal on quantum, point that would arise for
consideration is "whether assessment of compensation by
tribunal calls for interference?"
5. On perusal of impugned award, it is seen that
while assessing loss of dependency tribunal has not added
future prospects though deceased was 38 years of age.
Though insurer would be justified in submitting that award
was excessive under conventional heads, possibility of
(2017) 16 SCC 680
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6877
MFA No. 200188 of 2018
reduction would clearly be off-set by enhancement on
account of addition of future prospects. Therefore, there
would be no scope for interfering with award on quantum.
Point for consideration is answered in negative.
Consequently, following :
ORDER
Appeal is dismissed.
Amount in deposit is ordered to be transmitted to
tribunal for payment.
Balance compensation, if any shall be deposited
within six weeks from date of receipt of certified copy of
this judgment.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SN
