Karnataka High Court
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd vs Smt.Hanamavva W/O Ningabasappa ... on 18 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6506
MFA No. 101914 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101914 OF 2018 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,
THE BRANCH MANAGER, P. B. ROAD,
OPP: KITTEL COLLEGE, DHARWAD,
PINCODE: 580001, REPRESENTED BY ITS
DULY CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. ASAMA, FOR
SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. HANAMAVVA W/O. NINGABASAPPA GOTAGI,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE HOLD WORK.
2. SRI. NINGABASAPPA S/O. NEELAPPA GOTAGI,
AGED AB0UT 26 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
BOTH ARE R/O. KELUR, TQ: HUNAGUND,
DIST: BAGALKOT, PINCODE: 587118.
Digitally signed
3. SHANTAPPA S/O. NINGAPPA BENAKATTI,
by JAGADISH T AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF TRACTOR AND
R TRAILER BEARING NO.KA-29/T-3616 AND T-3617,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF R/O. HIREMYAGERI, TQ AND DIST:BAGALKOT,
KARNATAKA PINCODE: 587101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAHUL KUNTOJI FOR
SRI. GIRISH A. YADAWAD, ADV. FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 SERVED,
NOTICE TO R3 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO
CALL FOR THE RECORDS CONNECTED WITH MVC NO.545/2012 ON
THE FILE OF THE COURT OF MEMBER, MACT NO.III, BAGALKOT
EXAMINE THE SAME AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 01-03-2018 AS AGAINST THE APPELLANT IN THE INTEREST
OF JUSTICE.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6506
MFA No. 101914 of 2018
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS ON INTERLOCUTORY
APPLICATION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for orders, with the consent
of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final
disposal.
2. This appeal is filed by the insurance company
challenging the quantum of compensation being aggrieved by
the judgment and award dated 01.03.2018 passed in
MVC.No.545/2012 by the Member, MACT-III, Bagalkot, (for
short, 'Tribunal').
3. Heard Smt.Asama, learned counsel appearing for
Smt.Preethi Shashank, learned counsel for the appellant-
insurance company and Sri.Rahul Kuntoji, learned counsel
appearing for Sri.Girish A.Yadawad, learned counsel for the
respondent No.1-claimant.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-
insurance company submits that the Tribunal has committed
grave error in awarding total compensation of Rs.5,65,000/- to
the claimant for the death of the minor, who was aged about
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6506
14 years on the date of accident. She submits that the award of
compensation by the Tribunal is contrary to the various
decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hence, she seeks to allow
the appeal by reducing the compensation.
5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent No.1-claimant supports the impugned judgment
and award of the Tribunal and submits that the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the recent decision in the case of Meena
Devi vs. Nunu Chand Mahto @ Nemchand Mahto &
others1 has awarded total compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- in
the case of minor death, who was aged about 12 years. Hence,
he seeks to apply the said ratio and dispose of the appeal.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the material available on record.
7. It is not in dispute that the minor Hanamath, who
was aged about 14 years, met with a road accident on
08.02.2012 and succumbed to the injuries sustained in the said
accident. The Tribunal, considering the evidence on record,
awarded total compensation of Rs.5,65,000/- along with
Civil Appeal No.7255/2022 dated 13.10.2022
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6506
interest at 6% p.a. On re-appreciation of the pleadings and
material available on record and also taking note of the
enunciation of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of Meena Devi vs. Nunu Chand Mahto @
Nemchand Mahto & others referred supra, this Court is of
the considered view that the claimant is entitled to total
compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- in the instant case.
8. It would be useful to extract paragraph Nos.11 to
15 of the aforesaid judgment for ready reference.
"11. Recently in the case of Kurvan Ansari @ Kurvan
Ali & another vs. Shyam Kishore Murmu and
another (2022) 1 SCC 317, wherein a child aged about
7 years died in a road accident took place on 6.9.2004,
this Court taking notional income as Rs.25,000/-,
applying the multiplier of 15, calculated the loss of
dependency as Rs.3,75,000/- and adding Rs.55,000/- in
conventional heads, awarded Rs.4,70,000/-.
12. In view of the foregoing decisions, it is apparent
that in the cases of child death, the notional income of
Rs.15,000/- as specified in the IInd Schedule of M.V. Act
has been enhanced on account of devaluation of money
and value of rupee coming down from the date on which
the IInd Schedule of M.V.Act was introduced and the
said notional income was treated as Rs.30,000/- in the
case of Kishan Gopal (supra) and Rs.25,000/- in
Kurvan Ansari (supra) in age group of 10 and 7 years
respectively.
13. Thus applying the ratio of the said judgments,
looking to the age of the child in the present case i.e., 12
years, the principles laid down in the case of Kishan
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6506
Gopal (supra) are aptly applicable to the facts of the
present case. As per the ocular statement of the mother
of the deceased, it is clear that deceased was a brilliant
student and studying in a private school. Therefore,
accepting the notional earning Rs.30,000/- including
future prospect and applying the multiplier of 15 in view
of the decision of this Court in Sarla Verma (supra), the
loss of dependency comes to Rs.4,50,000/- and if we
add Rs.50,000/- in conventional heads, then the total
sum of compensation comes to Rs.5,00,000/-. As per the
judgment of MACT, lump sum compensation of
Rs.1,50,000/- has been awarded, while the High Court
enhanced it to Rs.2,00,000/- up to the value of the
Claim Petition. In our view, the said amount of
compensation is not just and reasonable looking to the
computation made hereinabove. Hence, we determine
the total compensation as Rs.5,00,000/- and on reducing
the amount as awarded by the High Court i.e.,
Rs.2,00,000/-, the enhanced amount comes to
Rs.3,00,000/-.
14. At this stage, it is necessary to clarify that as per
the decision of a Three-Judge Bench of this Court in
Nagappa vs. Gurdayal Singh and others (2003) 2
SCC 274, it was observed that under the MV Act, there is
no restriction that the Tribunal/Court cannot award
compensation exceeding the amount so claimed. The
Tribunal/Court ought to award 'just' compensation which
is reasonable in the facts relying upon the evidence
produced on record. Therefore, less valuation, if any,
made in the Claim Petition would not be impediment to
award just compensation exceeding the claimed amount.
15. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. The amount of
compensation, as awarded by the High Court is
enhanced by Rs.3,00,000/-, in addition. The total
amount of compensation would be Rs.5,00,000/-, The
enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 7% p.a. from
the date of Claim Petition till realization. The due amount
be paid by the respondent No.4-United India Insurance
Company within a period of four weeks from today."
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6506
9. Keeping in mind the enunciation of law laid down by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred supra, the impugned
judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified by restricting
the compensation to Rs.5,00,000/-, which shall carry interest
at the rate of 6% p.a. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass
the following:
ORDER
a) Appeal stands allowed in part.
b) The impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal is modified to an extent that the
respondent-claimant would be entitled to total
compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- as against
Rs.5,65,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
c) The modified compensation amount shall carry
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the
date of petition till the date of payment.
d) The Insurance Company shall deposit the
modified compensation amount with accrued
interest before the Tribunal within a period of
six weeks from the date of receipt of certified
copy of this judgment.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6506
e) Apportionment, deposit and disbursement shall
be made as per the award of the Tribunal.
f) Registry to send the records to the Tribunal
forthwith.
g) Draw modified award accordingly.
In view of disposal of the main appeal, I.A.No.1/2024 does
not survive for consideration.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BSR
Ct-an
