Karnataka High Court
M. N. Pradeep vs N. R. Mohan on 22 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:15782
MFA No. 8666 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8666 OF 2017(MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. M. N. PRADEEP
S/O N.R. MOHANA
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
R/O BRAHMAPURA VILLAGE,
BELAGOLA HOBLI,
SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571438.
2. N.M. MADAN
S/O N.R. MOHANA
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
R/O BRAHMAPURA VILLAGE,
BELAGOLA HOBLI,
SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571438.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. V.N. MADHAVA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
MOUNESHWARAPPA AND:
NAGARATHNA
Location: HIGH
1. N. R. MOHAN
COURT OF S/O N.V. RAMAKRISHNA
KARNATAKA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
R/O BRAHAMAPURA VILLAGE,
BELAGOLA HOBLI, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571438.
2. IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INS. CO. LTD.,
1ST FLOOR, NEAR AKSHAYA BHANDAR
NEW KANTHARAJ URS ROAD,
KUVEMPUNAGAR,
MYSURU - 570 023.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1 NOTICE SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:15782
MFA No. 8666 of 2017
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 11.03.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.862/2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, SRIRANGAPATNA, 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 is filed by the claimants aggrieved by
the Judgment and Award dated 11.03.2016 passed in MVC
No.862/2015 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge and
MACT, Srirangapatna (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'),
whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,10,000/- as
compensation.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before
the Tribunal.
3. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation
of Rs.20,00,000/- on account of death of one B.N. Latha who
met with an accident on 04.06.2015 at about 5.30 p.m. on
Mysore - Bengaluru road near highway dhaba, Srirangapatna
Taluk. The deceased B.N. Latha was proceeding in a
NC: 2024:KHC:15782
motorcycle bearing registration No. KA-11-N-7763 as a pillion
rider along with rider of the motorcycle i.e. her husband. The
husband of the deceased rode the motorcycle in a high speed,
rash and negligent manner and in order to overtake a lorry, he
turned the motorcycle towards the right side, at that time, B.N.
Latha fell down and sustained grievous injuries. She was taken
to Columbia Asia Hospital, Mysuru, where she was treated as
in-patient and on 05.06.2015 she was shifted to General
Hospital at Srirangapatna and on the same day she succumbed
to the injuries, in the hospital. Hence, claimants No.1 and 2
who are the children and claimant No.3 father-in-law of the
deceased B.N. Latha, filed claim petition against the
respondents, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988, seeking compensation. The Tribunal having awarded a
meagre sum of Rs.3,10,000/-, being aggrieved, the claimants
have preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation.
4. Heard Sri. V.N. Madhava Reddy, learned counsel for
claimants and Sri. B.C. Shivanne Gowda, learned counsel for
respondent No.2 - Insurance Company and perused the
Judgment and Award of the Tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC:15782
5. As there is no dispute regarding death of B.N. Latha
who died in a road traffic accident that occurred on 04.06.2015
due to rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle bearing
Registration No.KA-11-N-7763 and liability on the part of the
Insurer of the offending motorcycle, the only point that arises
for consideration in this appeal is, whether the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable
or does it call for any enhancement?
6. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the
parties and perusing the Judgment and Award of the Tribunal, I
am of the view, that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
is not just and reasonable, it is on the lower side and hence,
required to be enhanced.
7. The claimants in order to prove their case,
examined claimant No.2 as P.W.1 and one eye-witness Sri.
N.Shivaswamy as P.W.2 and got exhibited the documents at
Exs.P1 to P25.
8. On behalf of the respondents, none of the witnesses
were examined. The first respondent who is none other than
the husband of the deceased B.N. Latha admitted that the
NC: 2024:KHC:15782
claimants are related to him. The very fact that the deceased
was travelling in the motorcycle with her husband, he rode the
motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner and took right
deviation, thus, she fell down and sustained grievous injuries
all over her body and later she succumbed to the injuries, is not
disputed by the first respondent. However it is the contention
of the first respondent that as the offending motorcycle was
insured, he is not liable to pay any compensation and it is for
the second respondent - Insurer to pay compensation in the
event of claimants succeeding in the claim petition.
9. The second respondent - Insurance Company
denied all the petition averments including the occurrence of
the accident. However, it admitted the fact that the motorcycle
bearing Registration No.KA-11-N-7763 was insured with it. It
was further contended by the second respondent that as the
driver/first respondent did not have valid driving licence as on
the date of the occurrence of the accident, the Insurance
Company is not liable to pay compensation and accordingly,
sought for dismissal of the claim petition. However, in the
absence of any oral or documentary evidence led by the
respondent No.2, the said contention of violating policy
NC: 2024:KHC:15782
conditions by respondent No.1 was not accepted by the
Tribunal.
10. The claimants herein are the legal representatives
of the deceased who are entitled to claim compensation in
terms of the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of MANJURI BERA (SMT.) Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE
CO. LTD. & ANOTHER reported in (2207) 10 SCC 643. It
would be incumbent on the Tribunal to consider the petition
notwithstanding that the legal representatives are not fully
dependent on the deceased as held by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND
OTHERS Vs. BIRENDAR AND OTHERS [CIVIL APPEAL
Nos.242-243/2020 D.D. 13.01.2020].
11. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of
BASAVARAJ GOWDANA AND OTHERS Vs.
V.MUNICHANDRA AND OTHERS [MFA No.2669/2013 D.D.
10.06.2015], having regard to the claim made by brothers
and sisters of the deceased therein and his occupation as a
driver in a private limited company, assessed the loss of estate
NC: 2024:KHC:15782
considering 50% of the monthly income of the deceased by
applying the multiplier method.
12. In the light of the aforesaid Judgments, this Court is
of the considered opinion that the claimants are entitled to loss
of estate. The claimants have stated that the deceased was
running a flour mill in her village and her monthly income was
Rs.15,000/-. But they have not produced any document to
show that deceased was running a flour mill. Considering her
age at 47 years, year of accident being 2015, her income can
be assessed at Rs.9,000/- per month, in view of the Circular
issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority,
Bengaluru and High Court Legal Services Committee,
Bengaluru.
13. The claimants No.1 and 2 are major sons of
deceased B.N. Latha. Therefore, half of her income has to be
deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased and
remaining half of income would be for her family contributions
and the multiplier applicable to her age group is 13. The
monthly income of the deceased is assessed at Rs.9,000/-.
Towards future prospects, 30% will have to be added i.e.
NC: 2024:KHC:15782
Rs.11,700/-. Considering the savings of the deceased at 50%
and applying the multiplier of 13, loss of estate is arrived at
Rs.9,12,600/- (5850 x 12 x 13). The Tribunal has awarded
Rs.50,000/- towards loss of love and affection. Therefore, the
claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.9,12,600/- under the
head 'loss of estate and loss of love and affection'.
14. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.25,000/- towards
funeral expenses which is on the higher side and same is
reduced to Rs.15,000/-. Further, the Tribunal has awarded a
sum of Rs.1,35,000/- towards medical bills as per Ex.P9 which
is just and reasonable and hence, no interference is called for.
15. Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following
compensation:
HEADS AMOUNT
(In Rupees)
Loss of estate and loss of love 9,12,600-00
and affection
Medical bills 1,35,000-00
Funeral expenses 15,000-00
Total 10,62,600-00
Less: Compensation 3,10,000-00
awarded by the Tribunal --------------------
7,52,600-00
NC: 2024:KHC:15782
16. In the result, the following:
ORDER
The appeal is allowed in part.
The claimants are entitled to total compensation of
Rs.10,62,600/- as against Rs.3,10,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
The Judgment and Award dated 11.03.2016 in MVC
No.862/2015 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT,
Srirangapatna, is modified to the extent stated hereinabove.
The claimants are entitled for the additional enhanced
compensation of Rs.7,52,600/- with interest at 6% per annum
from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation.
Sd/-
JUDGE
sac
