Karnataka High Court
Smt. Rukmini C. M vs The Manager on 7 December, 2023
Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:44422
MFA No. 1364 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1364 OF 2021 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. RUKMINI C. M.
W/O. NAGARAJA. M
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
2. MASTER. KUSHAL. N
S/O. NAGARAJA. M
AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS
3. SMT. NARAYANAMMA
W/O. MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
ALL ARE R/AT CHOKKAREDDIHALLI VILLAGE
KAGATHI POST, CHINTHAMANI TALUK
CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-563 146.
Digitally signed
by
DHANALAKSHMI AND ALSO RESIDING AT
MURTHY
NOOGALBANDE, MULBAGAL TOWN
Location: High
Court of MULBAGAL, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 131.
Karnataka ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGER
ICICI LOMBARD MOTOR INS. CO. LTD.,
NO.121, THE ESTATE BUILDING
9TH FLOOR, DICKSON ROAD
BENGALURU-560 001.
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:44422
MFA No. 1364 of 2021
2. SMT. PAVITHRA. S
W/O. B. G. NAGARAJ
NO.786/3, NEAR RVM KALYANA MANTAPA
SARJAPURA POST, ANEKAL TALUK
BENGALURU-562 125.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B C SHIVANNE GOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R1:
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED:04.12.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1862/2019 ON
THE FILE OF THE XV ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE
AND XXIII ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-
19), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, 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 04.12.2019 passed by the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal & XV Addl. Judge, SCCH-19,
Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru (for short 'the Tribunal') in MVC
No.1862/2019.
NC: 2023:KHC:44422
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 08.03.2019 at about 4.45 a.m.
the deceased Nagaraja was sleeping on footpath of
Panathur main road, near Devarabisanahalli. At that time,
a water tanker bearing registration No.KA-41/B-8546
which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner,
dashed against the deceased. As a result of the aforesaid
accident, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and
succumbed to the injuries at the spot.
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, the respondent No.1
appeared through counsel and filed written statement in
which the averments made in the petition were denied.
The age, occupation and income of the deceased are
denied. It was pleaded that the accident was due to the
negligence of the deceased himself. It was further pleaded
NC: 2023:KHC:44422
that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess
valid driving licence as on the date of the accident. It was
further pleaded that the liability is subject to terms and
conditions of the policy. It was further pleaded that the
quantum of compensation claimed by the claimants is
exorbitant. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the petition.
The respondent No.1 did not appear before the Tribunal
inspite of service of notice and hence was placed ex-parte.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the
Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded
the evidence. The claimants, in order to prove their case,
examined claimant No.1 as PW-1 and another witness as
PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to
Ex.P22. On behalf of respondents, one witness was
examined as RW-1 and got exhibited documents namely
Ex.R1 to Ex.R3. 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
NC: 2023:KHC:44422
sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The
Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled to a
compensation of Rs.31,74,000/- along with interest at the
rate of 9% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to
deposit the compensation amount along with interest.
Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimants has
contended that at the time of the accident the deceased
was working as a supervisor and his take home salary was
Rs.24,250/- per month. But the Tribunal is not justified in
taking the monthly income of the deceased as only
Rs.18,000/-. Hence, he prays for allowing the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the
Insurance Company has raised the following contentions:
(i) Firstly, even though the claimants have produced
the salary certificate of the deceased, as on the date of
joining, his salary was Rs.18,000/- per month. Therefore,
NC: 2023:KHC:44422
the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the
deceased notionally.
(ii) Secondly, in view of the Division Bench decision
of this Court in the case of MS.JOYEETA BOSE AND
OTHERS vs. VENKATESHAN.V AND OTHERS (MFA
5896/2018 and connected matters disposed of on
24.8.2020), the interest granted by the Tribunal at the
rate of 9% p.a. is on the higher side. Hence, he prays for
dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the judgment and award and original records.
9. It is not in dispute that Nagaraja died in the
road traffic accident occurred on 08.03.2019 due to rash
and negligent driving of the water tanker bearing
registration No.KA-41/B-8546 by its driver.
10. The specific case of the claimants is that at the
time of the accident deceased was working as a supervisor
and he was earning Rs.24,250/- per month. To prove the
same he has produced salary certificates as Exs. P10 to
NC: 2023:KHC:44422
P12 and also examined the employer as PW2. It is very
clear from the salary certificate that the net salary
received by the deceased was Rs.24,250/- after deducting
PT, ESI and PF. Therefore, the take home salary of the
deceased has to be taken as Rs.24,250/- per month. To
the aforesaid amount, the Tribunal has rightly added 40%
on account of future prospects in view of the law laid down
by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. -v- PRANAY SETHI
AND OTHERS reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157. Thus, the
monthly income comes to Rs.33,950/-, out of which, the
Tribunal rightly deducted 1/3rd towards personal expenses
of the deceased and therefore, the monthly income comes
to Rs.22,634/-. The deceased was aged about 36 years at
the time of the accident and multiplier applicable to his
age group is '15'. Thus, the claimants are entitled to
compensation of Rs.40,74,120/- (Rs.22,634*12*15) on
account of 'loss of dependency'. The compensation
awarded by the Tribunal on the other heads is just and
reasonable.
NC: 2023:KHC:44422
11. In view of the above, I pass the following order:
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The judgment of the claims Tribunal is modified.
The claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.40,74,120/-
under the head 'loss of dependency' in place of
Rs.30,24,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The
compensation awarded by the Tribunal on the other heads
remains unaltered.
(iii) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest 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, excluding interest for the
delayed period of 316 days in filing the appeal on the
enhanced compensation.
(iv) The enhanced compensation carries interest @
6% p.a.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CM
