Karnataka High Court
Husensab And Anr vs Geeta And Anr on 4 April, 2024
Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2826-DB
MFA No.201509 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K V ARAVIND
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201509 OF 2023 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. HUSENSAB
S/O SAIPANSAB NADAF
AGE: 66 YEARS
OCC: NIL
R/O BALAGANUR
TALUK: SINDAGI
DISTRICT: VIJAYAPURA.
2. KASHIMBI
W/O HUSENSAB NADAF
AGE: 61 YEARS
Digitally signed by
BASALINGAPPA OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
SHIVARAJ
DHUTTARGAON R/O BALAGANUR
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
TALUK: SINDAGI
KARNATAKA DISTRICT : VIJAYAPURA.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V.BIRADAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. GEETA
W/O BHEEMASHYA YANTAMAN
AGE: 46 YEARS
OCC: AGRICULTURE
R/O BASAVA NAGAR, ALMEL
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2826-DB
MFA No.201509 of 2023
TALUK: SINDAGI
DISTRICT: VIJAYAPURA.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
1ST FLOOR, SANGAMA BUILDING
S.S.FRONT ROAD
VIJAYAPURA - 586 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI B.K.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED IN THE CLAIM
PETITION BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
06.12.2021 PASSED BY THE COURT OF III ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MEMBER, M.A.C.T.-IV,
AT VIJAYAPURA, IN M.V.C.NO.630/2017 IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY
H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the claimants being
aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 06.12.2021
passed by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge
and Member, MACT-IV, Vijayapura in MVC No.630/2017.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2826-DB
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly
stated are that on 23.05.2017 at 9.00 hours, near Honnalli
village, on Almel-Sindagi Road, while the deceased Nazeer
was traveling in the Tum Tum Jeep bearing No.KA-28-C-
7422 from Almel towards Balaganur side which was driven
in slow and cautious manner, at that time, a Bolero Jeep
bearing Reg.No.KA-28-M-8120 came from hind side being
driven by its driver in rash and negligent manner and
dashed to the said Jeep and caused the accident, due to
which the deceased sustained grievous injuries and died
on the spot. The deceased was aged 23 years and
working as agriculturist and thereby earning Rs.15,000/-
per month.
3. The claimants being the dependents of deceased filed
claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act
seeking compensation for the death of the deceased along
with interest.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2826-DB
4. Though summons was served, respondent No.1
remained absent and placed exparte, whereas respondent
No.2 appeared pursuant to summons and filed written
statement denying the petition averments.
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 common documents
were exhibited on his behalf and on behalf of other
claimants, which are marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P25. On
behalf of respondents, one witness was examined as
R.W.1 and one document namely Copy of the policy was
marked as Ex.R.1. 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 said injuries. The
Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled to a
compensation of Rs.11,37,000/- along with interest at the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2826-DB
rate of 6% p.a. and directed the respondent No.2 to
deposit the compensation along with interest. Being
aggrieved by the same, this appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimants has raised the
following contentions:
a) Firstly, at the time of accident, the deceased was
aged about 23 years. In view of 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], 40% of the income of the deceased
has to be added towards his monthly income while
granting compensation under the head 'loss of future
prospects'. The Tribunal has not granted any
compensation under the said head.
b) Secondly, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD. -V- NANU RAM [2018 ACJ 2782],
each of the claimants are entitled for compensation of
Rs.40,000/- under the head of 'loss of filial consortium'.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2826-DB
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Insurance
Company has raised the following counter contentions:
a) Firstly, the claimants have failed to establish the
income of the deceased. Since the claimants have not
established the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has
rightly not awarded compensation under the head 'loss of
future prospects'.
b) Secondly, considering the age and avocation of the
deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is just and reasonable. Hence, he sought 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 the deceased-Nazeer died in
a road traffic accident that occurred on 23.05.2017, due to
rash and negligent driving of the jeep bearing registration
No.KA-28/M-8120. The Tribunal has considered the
evidence of the parties and has rightly assessed the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2826-DB
notional income of the deceased at Rs.10,250/-. At the
time of the accident, the deceased was aged about 23
years. To the aforesaid income, 40% has to be added on
account of future prospects in view of the law laid down by
the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in 'PRANAY
SETHI' (supra). Thus, the monthly income of the
deceased comes to Rs.14,350/- [Rs.10,250/- + 40%
(Rs.4,100/-)]. Since the deceased was bachelor at the
time of accident, 50% of the income has to be deducted
towards his personal expenses. At the time of the
accident, the deceased was 23 years and multiplier
applicable to his age group is '18'. Thus, the claimants are
entitled to compensation of Rs.15,49,800/- (Rs.7,175
*12*18*) on account of 'loss of dependency'.
10. 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'.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2826-DB
11. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in
the case of 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE' (supra),
claimant Nos.1 and 2 being the parents of the deceased
are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- each under
the head 'loss of filial consortium'.
12. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following
compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 15,49,800
Funeral expenses 15,000/-
Loss of estate 15,000/-
Loss of Filial consortium 80,000/-
Total 16,59,800
13. In the result, the following order is passed:
NC: 2024:KHC-K:2826-DB
ORDER
a) The appeal is allowed in part.
b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is
modified.
c) The claimants are entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.16,59,800/- as against
Rs.11,37,000/- awarded by the Tribunal along
with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
d) The Respondent No.2 - Insurance Company is
directed to deposit compensation amount
along with interest at the rate of 6% per
annum 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
a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
VNR
