Karnataka High Court
United India Insurance Co.Ltd vs Mathuramma on 2 June, 2023
Bench: N S Gowda
-1-
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1421 OF 2019
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1419 OF 2019
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1420 OF 2019
MFA CROSS OBJECTION NO. 59 OF 2019
MFA CROSS OBJECTION NO. 62 OF 2019
MFA CROSS OBJECTION NO. 63 OF 2019
IN M.F.A.No.1421/2019:
BETWEEN:
1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD
Digitally
BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE T P HUB
signed by KRUSHI BHAVAN, 6TH FLOOR,
PANKAJA S
Location: NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
HIGH NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA BANGALORE - 560001
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MATHURAMMA
W/O LATE CHKKAMAREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
R/AT NO 13, HANAKDABARU KODIHALLI,
-2-
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
KANAKAPURA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT PIN - 562119
2. VIJAYA KUMAR , MAJOR IN AGE,
S/O SHIVANNA,
R/AT NO 168, 2ND BLOCK,
PROMAD LAYOUT, R R NAGARA,
BANGALORE - 560 098.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. P.V.KALPANA., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
R-2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:30.08.2018
PASSED IN MVC NO.7919/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDITIONAL JUDGE, & XXVIII ACMM, COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU, [SCCH-13], AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.60,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN M.F.A.No.1419/2019:
BETWEEN:
1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.,LTD
BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE
(T P HUB) KRUSHI BHAVAN,
6TH FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE,
BANGALORE - 560001
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MATHURAMMA
W/O LATE CHKKAMAREGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
-3-
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
2. SHIVA SHANKAR,
S/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS,
3. KRUTHIKA,
D/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED 3 YEARS,
R-2 AND R-3 ARE MINORS,
HENCE REPRESENTED BY THEIR
MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN
MATHURAMMA.
4. HONNAMMA,
W/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/AT HONNA KADABURU,
HOSA DURGA, KANAKAPURA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT
PIN 562 119.
5. VIJAYAKUMAR, MAJOR IN AGE,
S/O SHIVANNA,
R/AT No.168, 2ND BLOCK,
PROMAD LAYOUT, R.R.NAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 098.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P.V.KALPANA., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
R-2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2018
PASSED IN MVC NO.7584/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDITIONAL JUDGE, & XXVIII ACMM, COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU, [SCCH-13], AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.13,91,091/- WITH INTEREST @ 6%
P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
-4-
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
IN M.F.A.No.1420/2019:
BETWEEN:
1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.,LTD
BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE, (T P HUB)
KRUSHI BHAVAN, 6TH FLOOR,
NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE,
BANGALORE - 560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. KRUTHIKA
D/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS.
SINCE MINOR REPT. MOTHER AND
NATURAL GUARDIAN MATHURAMMA
R/AT 13, HANAKDABARU, KODIHALLI,
KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGAR DIST.
PIN 562 119.
2. VIJAYA KUMAR
MAJOR IN AGE, S/O SHIVANNA
R/AT NO 168, 2ND BLOCK,
PROMAD LAYOUT, R R NAGAR A
BANGALORE - 560098
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.P.V.KALPANA., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
R-2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2018
PASSED IN MVC NO.7918/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II
ADDITIONAL JUDGE, & XXVIII ACMM, COURT OF SMALL
-5-
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU, [SCCH-13], AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.70,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN M.F.A.CROB.No.59/2019:
BETWEEN:
1. MATHURAMMA,
W/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
2. SHIVASHANKAR,
S/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS,
3. KRUTHIKA,
D/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS,
4. HONNAMMA,
W/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
APPELLANT No.2 & 3 ARE MINORS,
AND THEY ARE REPT. BY THEIR MOTHER/
APPELLANT No.1 AS NATURAL GUARDIAN.
ALL ARE R/AT HONNAKADABURU,
HOSADURGA KANAKAPURA TALUK,
RAMANAGAR - 562 119.
...CROSS OBJECTORS
(BY SMT. KALPANA.P.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGER,
M/S UNITED INDIA INS. CO.LTD
BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE (T P HUB)
KRISHIBHAVAN BUILDING,
-6-
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
6TH FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE,
BANGALORE-560 001.
2. VIJAYA KUMAR,
MAJOR IN AGE,
S/O SHIVANNA,
R/AT No.168, 2ND BLOCK,
PRAMOD LAYOUT, R R NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 098.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
V/C/O DATED:29/03/2023 NOTICE TO R-2 IS HELD
SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA CROB IN MFA No.1419/2019 PASSED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC READ WITH SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
30.08.2018 PASSED ON MVC NO.7584/2016 ON THE FILE OF
THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE, & XXVIII ACMM, COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU, [SCCH-13], PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN M.F.A.CROB.No.62/2019:
BETWEEN:
1. MATHURAMMA,
W/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
R/AT No.13, HANAKADABURU,
KODIHALLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
...CROSS OBJECTOR
(BY SMT. KALPANA P.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGER,
-7-
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
M/S UNITED INDIA INS. CO.LTD.,
BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE (T P HUB)
KRISHIBHAVAN BUILDING,
6TH FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. VIJAYA KUMAR,
MAJOR IN AGE,
S/O SHIVANNA,
R/AT No. 168, 2ND BLOCK,
PRAMOD LAYOUT, R R NAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 098.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
V/C/O DATED:29.03.2023 NOTICE TO R-2 IS HELD
SUFFICIENT.)
THIS MFA CROB IN MFA.No.1421/2019 FILED UNDER
ORDER XLI RULE 22 OF THE CPC AGAINST THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2018 PASSED IN MVC
NO.7919/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE, &
XXVIII ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU (SCCH-13), PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN M.F.A.CROB No.63/2019:
BETWEEN:
1. KRUTHIKA,
D/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED AOBUT 3 YEARS,
SINCE APPELLANT IS A MINOR SHE IS
REPT. BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL
GUARDIAN. SMT. MATHURAMMA,
W/O LATE CHIKKAMAREGOWDA,
AGED AOBUT 29 YEARS,
R/AT No.13, HANAKADABURA,
-8-
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
KODIHALLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
...CROSS OBJECTOR
(BY SMT. KALPANA P.V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGER
M/S UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD.,
BANGALORE REGIONAL OFFICE (T P HUB)
KRISHIBHAVAN BUILDING,
6TH FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD,
NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE,
BANGALORE - 560 001.
2. VIJAYA KUMAR
MAJOR IN AGE
S/O SHIVANNA
R/AT NO 168, 2ND BLOCK,
PROMAD LAYOUT, R R NAGAR
BANGALORE - 560098
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAVISH BEENI., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
V/C/O DATED:29.03.23 NOTICE TO R-2 IS HELD
SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA CROB IN MFA.No.1420/2019 FILED UNDER
ORDER RULE 22 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 30.08.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.7918/2016 ON
THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE, & XXVIII ACMM,
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS ALONG WITH M.F.A.CROB Nos.59/2019,
62/2019 AND 63/2019, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-9-
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
JUDGMENT
1. With respect to an accident in which one
Chikkamaregouda, 38 years was killed and two other
people were injured, three claim petitions were filed.
2. The claim petitions were resisted by the insurer and
the owner of the offending vehicle, principally, on the
ground that the accident occurred purely on account of the
negligence of the deceased Chikkamaregouda and hence
neither the insurer nor the owner of the vehicle could be
made liable.
3. The case putforth by the claimants was that the
deceased and his wife and his minor daughter were
travelling in their Suzuki motor cycle bearing Registration
No.KA 42 J 3166 at which time the rider of the Bajaj
Pulsar motor cycle bearing Reg. No.KA 05 JD 0258 collided
with their motor cycle resulting in the death of
- 10 -
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
Chikkamaregouda and injuries to his wife and minor
daughter.
4. The insurer fundamentally contends that as could be
seen from the sketch Ex.R-8 the motor cycle driven by
Chikkamaregouda was actually travelling on the extreme
right hand side of the road and since the accident occurred
when Chikkamaregouda was riding his motor cycle on the
wrong side of the road, the entire negligence ought to
have been attributed to Chikkamaregouda.
5. It is also contended that initially the FIR had been
initiated against Chikkamaregouda, but on the basis of the
statement rendered by the injured, two days after the
accident, the police proceeded to prosecute the rider of
the Bajaj Pulsar motor cycle bearing Reg. No.KA 05 JD
0258 and this by itself indicates that the police were trying
to basically entangle rider of motor cycle in order to help
the deceased. It is contended that on the basis of this
statement recorded two days after the accident, a second
- 11 -
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
complaint was registered and the rider of the motor cycle
was prosecuted and therefore, no credence can be given
to the chargesheet that had been laid against the rider of
the motor cycle.
6. It is also contended that the statements given by the
witnesses in the criminal prosecution including that of the
Investigating Officer support the case of the rider of the
motor cycle and the negligence was entirely on the part of
Chikkamaregouda.
7. At the outset, it is to be noticed here that the rider of
the motor cycle bearing Reg. No.KA 05 JD 0258 Ramu was
working as a Head Constable at that relevant point of
time. Ramu has in fact been examined as R.W.1. The
examination-in-chief and the cross-examination of Ramu
reads as follows-
"Chief examination by the advocate for petitioner :
Today I am producing the following
documents as exhibited below :
- 12 -
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
Ex.R-1 : Entire order sheet in C.C.
No.1286/2017
Ex.R-2 : Certified copy of the final order in C.C.
No.1286/2017
Ex.R-3 : Eye witness deposition in C.C.
No.1286/2017
Ex.R-4 Deposition of Smt.Mathuramma the
petitioner in M.V.C. No.7919/16 in C.C.
No.1286/2017
Ex.R-5 Deposition of mahazar witness
Sri.Harish and Sri.Kumar in C.C.
No.1286/2017
Ex.R-6 Depositions of seizure mahazar witness
Sri.Govindaraju and Sri.Shivprasad S.
Ex.R-7 Deposition of Investigating Officer
Sri.Jayramu ASI, Sathanur Police
Station.
F PÉù£À°è ¤Dgï-2gÀ ¥ÀæPÁgÀ ¦gÁåzÀ£ÀÄß ¤ÃrgÀÄvÉÛãÉ.
¢:23.10.2016gÀAzÀÄ £Á£ÀÄ oÁt PÀvÀðªÀåªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄV¹ 12.00 UÀAmÉUÉ
oÁuɬÄAzÀ ºÉÆgÀlÄ £ÀªÀÄä vÁ¬ÄUÉ ºÀĵÁj®èzÀPÁgÀt zÉÆqÀØ
D®ºÀ½îUÉ ºÉÆÃV £ÉÆrzÁUÀ £ÀªÀÄä vÁ¬ÄAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ZÉ£ÀߥÀlÖt D¸ÀàvÉæUÉ
PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ ºÉÆÃVgÀÄvÁÛgÉ. zÉÆqÀØ D®ºÀ½î¬ÄAzÀ ¸ÁvÀ£ÀÆgÀÄ
ªÀiÁUÀðªÁV £Á£ÀÄ ZÉ£ÀߥÀlÖtPÉÌ ºÉÆÃUÀÄwÛzÉÝ£ÀÄ. ªÀÄÈvÀ
aPÀ̪ÀiÁgÀAiÀÄågÀªÀgÀÄ ¸ÁvÀ£ÀÆgÀÄ ªÀiÁUÀð¢AzÀ £À£Àß JzÀÄjUÉ
§gÀÄwÛzÀÝgÀÄ. ¸ÀzÀj C¥ÀWÁvÀ aPÀ̪ÀiÁgÀAiÀÄågÀªÀgÀ vÀ¦à¤AzÁVzÉ, £À£Àß
§®UÁ°£À ªÀÄArAiÀÄ°è ¥ÁæPÀÑgï DVvÀÄÛ. ¸ÀzÀj C¥ÀWÁvÀ ªÀÄÈvÀ
ªÀåQÛAiÀÄ vÀ¦à¤AzÁVzÀÝgÀÆ PÀÆqÀ CAwªÀÄ ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ°è £À£Àß vÀ¦à¤AzÀ
C¥ÀWÁvÀªÁVzÉ JAzÀÄ zÉƵÁgÉÆÃ¥Àt ¥ÀnÖAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¹gÀÄvÁÛgÉ.
- 13 -
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
¸ÀzÀj zÉƵÁgÉÆÃ¥Àt ¥ÀnÖAiÀÄ£ÀÄß £Á£ÀÄ ¥Àæ²ß¹zÉÝãÉ. £Á£ÀÄ
©qÀÄUÀqÉUÉÆArgÀÄvÉÛãÉ. ¸ÀzÀj C¥ÀWÁvÀ aPÀ̪ÀiÁgÀAiÀÄågÀªÀgÀ
vÀ¦à¤AzÁVzÉ.
¥Ánà ¸ÀªÁ®Ä :- CfðzÁgÀgÀ ¥ÀgÀ ªÀQîjAzÀ:-
2 ¢£ÀzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ £Á£ÀÄ ¦gÁåzÀ£ÀÄß PÉÆqÀÄwÛzÉÝÃ£É JAzÀgÉ ¸Àj.
¸ÁQëAiÀÄÄ £Á£ÀÄ D¸ÀàvÉæAiÀÄ°è ºÉýPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤ÃrzÉÝãÉ. C¥ÀWÁvÀªÁzÀ
£ÀAvÀgÀ ªÀÄÈvÀ£À£ÀÄß DåA§Ä¯É£ïì£À°è PÀgÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀÄ ºÉÆÃzÀgÀÄ, £Á£ÀÄ
SÁ¸ÀV D¸ÀàvÉæUÉ ºÉÆÃzÉ£ÀÄ. JzÀÄjUÉ §gÀÄwÛzÀÝ ªÀåQÛAiÀÄÄ ªÀÄzÀå¥Á£À
ªÀiÁrzÉÝ£ÉÆà E®èªÉÇà JA§ §UÉÎ £À£ÀUÉ UÉÆwÛ®è JAzÀgÉ ¸Àj, DzÀgÉ
C°èzÀÝ d£ÀgÀÄ ºÁUÉ ªÀiÁvÀ£ÁqÀÄwÛzÀÝgÀÄ. £Á£ÀÄ ¦gÁåzÀ£ÀÄß D¸ÀàvÉæAiÀÄ°è
¤ÃrgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ £À£ÀUÉ «ZÁgÀ ºÉýzÀ d£ÀgÀÄ C°è EgÀ°®è JAzÀgÉ
¸ÁQëAiÀÄÄ £Á£ÀÄ D¸ÀàvÉæAiÀÄ°è ºÉýPÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤ÃrzÉÝãÉ, ¸ÁªÀðd¤PÀ
D¸ÀàvÉæAiÀÄ°è EgÀ°®è. ¸ÀzÀj C¥ÀWÁvÀzÀ°è £Á£ÀÄ DgÉÆævÀ JAzÀÄ
£À£Àß ªÉÄÃ¯É zÉƵÁgÉÆ¥Àt ¥ÀnÖAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¸À¯ÁVzÉ JAzÀgÉ ¸Àj,
ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgÉzÀÄ ¸ÁQëAiÀÄÄ £Á£ÀÄ ©qÀÄUÀqÉUÉÆArzÉÝÃ£É JAzÀÄ
£ÀÄrAiÀÄÄvÁÛgÉ. ¸ÁQë DzsÁgÀUÀ¼À PÉÆgÀvɬÄAzÁV £À£ßÀ £ÀÄß ©qÀÄUÀqÉ
ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVzÉ JAzÀgÉ ¸ÀjAiÀÄ®è. £Á£ÀÄ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀ£ÁVgÀĪÀÅzÀjAzÀ
£À£Àß PÀvÀðªÀåPÉÌ vÉÆAzÀgÉAiÀiÁUÀÄvÀÛzÉ JA§ GzÉÝñÀ¢AzÀ
£ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è ¸ÀļÀÄî ¸ÁQë ºÉüÀÄwÛzÉÝÃ£É JAzÀgÉ ¸ÀjAiÀÄ®è.
ªÀÄgÀÄ«ZÁgÀuÉ E®è"
8. As could be seen from the evidence of Ramu, apart
from making a vague assertion that the accident occurred
- 14 -
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
due to the negligence on the part of Chikkamaregouda
there is absolutely no details forthcoming in the evidence
as to how the accident actually occurred and how
Chikkamaregouda was actually responsible for the
accident. It is to be kept in mind that Ramu, being a Head
Constable, was under an obligation to narrate the exact
manner in which the accident occurred. Nowhere in his
deposition he has even whispered that Chikkamaregouda
was driving on the wrong side of the road. In the absence
of any evidence by the only eye-witnesses to the accident,
who was examined, namely, Ramu to the effect that
Chikkamaregouda was responsible for the accident, the
arguments based on the sketch Ex.R-8 or on the
depositions of the witnesses in the Criminal Court would
be of little relevance.
9. It is also to be borne in mind that notwithstanding
the fact that Ramu was a Head Constable, the Police have
laid a chargesheet against the one of their own Personnel
- 15 -
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
and this by itself indicates that negligence was on the part
of Ramu. The chargesheet laid against Ramu therefore
would be of significance and the fact that Ramu was
responsible for the accident becomes clear especially in
the absence of any oral evidence from his side to the
effect that Chikkamaregouda was driving the motor cycle
on the wrong side of the road. I am, therefore, of the
view that the Tribunal was justified in coming to the
conclusion that Ramu was responsible for the accident and
as a consequence the insurer of the motor cycle that he
was riding would also be responsible for the accident. The
appeals of the insurer, therefore, on the ground of
negligence are dismissed.
10. As far as the argument that the witnesses from the
Criminal Court had clearly deposed that Chikkamaregouda was
responsible for the accident is concerned, it has to be stated
here that the evidence recorded before the Criminal Court
which was not subjected to cross-examination by the claimants,
cannot be considered as credible evidence to apportion the
- 16 -
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
negligence on Chikkamaregouda. Unless the claimants had the
right to cross-examine the witnesses before the Criminal Court,
their deposition cannot really be of consequence in the
proceedings under the Motor Vehicles Act.
11. As far as compensation is concerned, the Tribunal
has determined the monthly income, notionally at
Rs.9,000/-. As there is no credible evidence to ascertain
the actual monthly income, it would be appropriate and
prudent to adopt the monthly income determined by
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, which, for the
accident of the year 2016, would be Rs.9,500/-.
12. Since the deceased was aged 38 years and was self
employed, 40% requires to be added to the monthly
income towards future prospects, which would result in the
income to be Rs.13,300/-. Out of this, ¼ would have to
be deducted towards personal expenses and his monthly
income thus would be Rs.9,975/-.
- 17 -
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
13. The income of the deceased for the purposes of
determining the loss of dependency would thus be
Rs.9,975/-.
14. As the deceased was aged 38 years, a multiplier of
'15' would have to be applied. Consequently, the
claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.17,95,500/-
(Rs.9,975/- x 12 x 15) towards "loss of dependency".
15. The claimants being the wife, children and mother ,
they would each be entitled to a sum of Rs.44,000/-
towards "loss of consortium" i.e., in all Rs.1,76,000/-
and they would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.33,000/-
under the "conventional heads".
16. The sum of Rs.46,091/- awarded towards 'medical
expenses' being based on documentary evidence is
affirmed.
17. Thus, the claimants, in modification of the impugned
award, would be entitled to the following sums:
- 18 -
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
Sl. Amount
Particulars
No. (In Rs.)
1. Loss of Dependency 17,95,500/-
2. Loss of Consortium 1,76,000/-
3. Conventional Heads 33,000/-
4. Medical expenses 46,091/-
Total 20,50,591/-
18. Thus, the claimant would be entitled for
compensation of Rs.20,50,591/- as against
Rs.13,91,091/- awarded by the Tribunal, along with
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of
petition till its realization.
19. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
amount of compensation awarded within a period of two
months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
judgment.
20. The disbursal of the compensation amount shall be
as per the terms of the award of the Tribunal.
- 19 -
MFA No. 1421 of 2019
C/W MFA No. 1419 of 2019
MFA No. 1420 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 59 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 62 of 2019
MFA.CROB No. 63 of 2019
21. Accordingly, M.F.A. Crob. No.59/2019 is allowed in
part.
22. As far as the Miscellaneous First Appeal Cross-
Objections filed by the injured - claimants in respect of the
injuries, it is noticed that Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.60,000/- and Rs.70,000/- for the simple injuries
suffered by them. In my view, the determination of
compensation for these minor injuries are just and proper
and do not call for enhancement. Consequently, the
Miscellaneous First Appeal Cross-Objections filed by the
injured - claimants are disposed of.
23. The appeals filed by insurer are therefore dismissed.
24. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transferred to
the Tribunal forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HNM
