Karnataka High Court
Smt Lalitha vs The New India Assurance Co Ltd on 23 September, 2023
Bench: H T Prasad
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:34609
MFA No. 1272 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1272 OF 2018 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT LALITHA
W/O LATE SEETHARAM D SUVARNA
AGED 58 YEARS.
2. SUNITHA
D/O LATE SEETHARAM D SUVARNA
AGED 37 YEARS.
3. AMITHA
D/O LATE SEETHARAM D SUVARNA
AGED 36 YEARS
4. MR DEEPAK
S/O LATE SEETHARAM D SUVARNA
Digitally signed AGED 32 YEARS
by ALL ARE R/O H NO.19-89A
DHANALAKSHMI
MURTHY S L NIVAS K S RAO NAGAR
Location: High KARNAK MULKI
Court of MANGALURU TALUK-574154
Karnataka
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. GURUPRASAD B R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD
DIVISIONAL OFFICE
GANESH BAZAR BUILDING
G H S ROAD, MANGALURU-575001
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:34609
MFA No. 1272 of 2018
2. M P ABDUL HAMEED
S/O P U ABDUL KHADER
ADULT
R/O PANAMBUR HOUSE
POST PADUBIDRI, ABEEDI ROAD
PADUBIDRI UDUPI-574111.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.R JAI PRAKASH., ADVOCATE FOR R1:
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH
UNDER ORDER DATED: 23.09.2023)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:18.10.2016
PASSED IN MVC NO.263/2014 ON THE FILE OF M.A.C.T. AND
III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MANGALURU,
DHAKSHINA KANNADA PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. 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 and award dated 18.10.2016 passed by the
MACT, Mangaluru, D.K. in MVC No.263/2014.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly
stated are that on 12.09.2013 at about 6.00 p.m. when
NC: 2023:KHC:34609
MFA No. 1272 of 2018
the deceased Seetharama D.Suvarna was proceeding on
the scooter bearing registration No.KA-10/S-6242
towards Mulki near Ksheerasagara of Bappanadu village/
At that time, a car bearing registration No.KA-20/Z-0935
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.
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 Nos.1 and 2
appeared through counsel and respondent No.2 filed
written statement in which the averments made in the
petition were denied. It was pleaded that the petition
itself is false and frivolous in the eye of law. It was further
pleaded that the accident was due to the rash and
negligent riding of the scooter by the deceased himself.
NC: 2023:KHC:34609
MFA No. 1272 of 2018
The driver of the offending vehicle did not possess valid
driving licence as on the date of the accident. The liability
is subject to terms and conditions of the policy. The age,
occupation and income of the deceased are denied. It was
further pleaded that the quantum of compensation claimed
by the claimants is exorbitant. Hence, they sought for
dismissal of the petition.
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 got exhibited
documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P11. On behalf of
respondents, no witness was examined but got exhibited
document namely Ex.R1. 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
NC: 2023:KHC:34609
MFA No. 1272 of 2018
a compensation of Rs.4,17,446/- along with interest at the
rate of 6% 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 raised the
following contentions:
a) Firstly, the claimants claim that the deceased was
aged about 63 years at the time of the accident and he
was earning Rs.30,000/- per month by working as tree
cutter. But the Tribunal is not justified in taking the
monthly income of the deceased as merely as Rs.5,000/-.
b) Secondly, the Tribunal instead of deducting 1/3rd of
the income of the deceased towards personal expenses,
has erred in deducting 50%.
c) Thirdly, at the time of the accident, the deceased
was aged about 63 years, but the Tribunal has erred in
applying the multiplier as '6' instead of applying multiplier
to the age group of 61-65 as '7'.
NC: 2023:KHC:34609
MFA No. 1272 of 2018
d) Fourthly, considering the age and avocation of the
deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, he prays for allowing
the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the
Insurance Company has raised the following counter-
contentions:
a) Firstly, the claimants claim that the deceased was
earning Rs.30,000/- per month. Since the deceased was
aged about 63 years and the claimants have not
established the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has
rightly assessed the income of the deceased notionally.
b) 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
consortium and funeral expenses awarded by the Tribunal
is on higher side.
c) Thirdly, on appreciation of oral and documentary
evidence and considering the age and avocation of the
NC: 2023:KHC:34609
MFA No. 1272 of 2018
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 judgment and award of the Tribunal.
9. It is not in dispute that Seetharam died in the road
traffic accident occurred on 12.09.2013 due to rash and
negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.
10. The claimants claim that deceased was earning
Rs.30,000/- 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 2013, the notional income of the
deceased has to be taken at Rs.8,000/- p.m. Since the
claimants are wife and major children, it is appropriate to
NC: 2023:KHC:34609
MFA No. 1272 of 2018
deduct 1/3rd of the income of the deceased towards
personal expenses. Thus, the monthly income comes to
Rs.5,334/-. The deceased was aged about 63 years at the
time of the accident and multiplier applicable to his age
group is '7'. Thus, the claimants are entitled to
compensation of Rs.4,48,056/- (Rs.5,334*12*7) on
account of 'loss of dependency'.
11. 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'.
12. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in
the case of 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE' (supra), claimant
Nos.2 to 4, children of the deceased are entitled for
compensation of Rs.40,000/- each under the head of 'loss
of parental consortium'.
NC: 2023:KHC:34609
MFA No. 1272 of 2018
13. The compensation of Rs.12,446/- awarded by the
Tribunal under the head of 'medical expenses' is as per the
medical bills produced by the claimants. The same is just
and reasonable.
14. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following
compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 4,48,056
Funeral expenses 15,000
Loss of estate 15,000
Loss of spousal 40,000
consortium
Loss of Parental 1,20,000
consortium
Medical Expenses 12,446
Total 6,50,502
15. In the result, I pass the following order:
ORDER
a) The appeal is allowed in part.
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC:34609
MFA No. 1272 of 2018
b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
c) The claimants are entitled to a total compensation of
Rs.6,50,502/- as against Rs.4,17,446/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
d) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
compensation amount along with interest @ 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.
e) In view of the order dated 23.09.2023 passed by this
Court, the claimants are not entitled for interest on the
enhanced compensation for the delayed period of 376
days in filing the appeal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HA
