Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Shri.Pintu S/O Pundalik Havaldar on 10 January, 2023
Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani
-1-
MFA No. 103365 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103365 OF 2018 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
THROUGH ITS DIVSIIONAL OFFICE, MARUTI GALLI
BELGAVI-590016.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. A G JADHAV, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI.PINTU S/O PUNDALIK HAVALDAR
AGE.32 YEARS, OCC.AGRICULTURE COOLIE
R/O JALAPUR, TQ. RAIBAG
DIST. BELAGAVI-591317.
2. SMT. RANJANA W/O PINTU HAVALDAR
AGE.24 YEARS, OCC.HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O JALAPUR, TQ. RAIBAG
DIST. BELAGAVI-591317.
3. SHRI. MANJUNATH BASAWANT KHANADALE
AGE.MAJOR, OCC.HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O JALAPUR, TQ. RAIBAG
DIST. BELAGAVI-591317.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.S.HATTIKATAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2; SRI.
SHIVARAJ S. BALLOLLI, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 8.5.2018 PASSED IN MVC
NO.1009/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, RAIBAG, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF Rs.5,00000/-WITH INTEREST AT 7% P.A. FROM
THE DATE OF PETITION.
THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDER, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
MFA No. 103365 of 2018
JUDGMENT
Challenging impugned judgment and award dated 08.05.2018
passed by Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C Raibag (referred to as
'Tribunal' for short), in MVC No.1009/2017, this appeal is filed by
insurer claiming quantum of compensation.
2. Occurrence of accident on 27.02.2017 due to rash and
negligent driving of insured vehicle bearing registration No.KA-
23/TC-351, resulting in death of Shreyas, aged about 2½ years is
not in dispute. Claimant filed claim petition under Section 166 of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Tribunal allowed claim petition awarding
compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- with interest at rate 7% per annum
holding insurer liable to pay same. Challenging said award insurer
is in appeal.
3. Sri.A.G.Jadhav, learned counsel for appellant/insurer
relying on decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of
R.K.MALIK AND ANOTHER VS. KIRAN PAL AND OTHERS
reported in (2009) 14 SCC 1, submitted that compensation
awarded was excessive, as Hon'ble Supreme Court in said
decision had granted compensation of Rs.3,75,000/- for death of
minor. Apart from above it was submitted that Tribunal was not
MFA No. 103365 of 2018
justified in awarding interest at rate of 7% per annum and sought
reduction.
4. On other hand, Sri. Santosh Hattikatagi, learned counsel for
claimant/respondents submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court in its
recent decision in KURVAN ANSARI VS. SHYAM KISHORE
COMPANY LIMITED reported in (2022) 1 SCC 317 had occasion
to refer to R.K.MALIK'S case also and held that in case of minor,
notional annual income was to be considered at Rs.30,000/- and
multiplier applicable would be '15'. Apart from said compensation,
award under conventional head was to be granted. It was
submitted that by re-computing compensation as per KURVAN
ANASARI's (supra), compensation awarded by Tribunal would be
fully justified and would not be excessive. Therefore, sought for
dismissal of appeal.
5. From above submission, point that arise for consideration
is:
"Whether compensation awarded by Tribunal requires for
modification?."
6. Occurrence of accident due to rash and negligent driving
of insured vehicle which resulted in death of Kumar Shreyas aged
about 2½ years in said accident is not in dispute. Though in case of
MFA No. 103365 of 2018
R.K.MALIK's, (supra) Hon'ble Supreme Court had awarded
compensation of Rs.3,75,000/-, in its recent decision, in KURVAN
ANASARI's (supra) after referring various decisions that Hon'ble
Supreme Court held that appropriate annual income to be
considered at Rs.30,000/-, and applying multiplier of '15', 'loss of
dependency' would be Rs.4,50,000/- (30,000 x 15). If award of
compensation under conventional head is added, compensation of
Rs.5,00,000/- granted by Tribunal would not be excessive or
unjustified. Therefore, insurer's challenge on quantum does not
hold merit.
7. However, this Court in SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED VS. RAJASTAN VS. SMT. LAXMI reported
in 2018 (4) AKR 808 has held that in case of motor accident claims
rate of interest awarded is 6% per annum. Therefore, Tribunal was
not justified in awarding interest at 7% per annum. To said extent
award requires modification.
8. Point for consideration is answered partly in affirmative.
Consequently, I pass following:
MFA No. 103365 of 2018
ORDER
a) MFA No.103365/2018 is allowed in part, only insofar
as reduction of rate of interest from 7% to 6% per
annum. In all other aspects award of Tribunal holds
good.
b) Amount in deposit is ordered to be transmitted to
Tribunal for payment and balance compensation, if
any, to be deposited within six weeks.
SD/-
JUDGE
AC
