Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Sir. Gadigeppa S/O Mahadevappa ... on 7 August, 2024
Author: Krishna S.Dixit
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
MFA No. 101817 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 101700 of 2017
MFA No. 101701 of 2017
MFA No. 101816 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101817 OF 2017 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101700 OF 2017(MV-D)
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101701 OF 2017 (MV-D)
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101816 OF 2017 (MV-D)
IN MFA NO. 101817 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. GADIGEPPA S/O. MAHADEVAPPA ORAGONDADA,
AGE 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, (NOW NIL).
2. SMT.SIDDALINGAMMA @ SIDDALINGAVVA,
W/O. GADIGEPPA ORAGONDADA,
AGE 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, (NOW NIL),
BOTH ARE R/O. ALADAKATTI,
Digitally signed TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581110.
by JAGADISH T R
...APPELLANTS
Location: High
Court of (BY SRI. G. S. HULMANI, ADVOCATE)
Karnataka
Dharwad Bench
AND:
1. MUTTIMANI R. B. S/O. BHARAMAPPA,
AGE MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. NIDENEGILU VILLAGE, PO: GUNDAGATTI,
TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI-581111.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, REGIONAL OFFICE,
2ND FLOOR, ARIHANT PLAZA, KUSUGAL ROAD,
HUBBALLI-580020.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S. ARANI, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
MFA No. 101817 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 101700 of 2017
MFA No. 101701 of 2017
MFA No. 101816 of 2017
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
1988, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE ADDL. SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT, RANEBENNUR AND MODIFY THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY LEARNED JUDGE IN M.V.C
NO.1938/2015 DATED 01ST MARCH 2017 AND ENHANCE THE
COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR AND ETC
IN MFA NO. 101700 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD,
REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR,
ARIHANT PLAZA, KUSUGAL ROAD, HUBBALLI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S. ARANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. HANUMANTAPPA S/O. NAGAPPA MAGOD,
AGE 48 YEARS, OCC: AUTO DRIVER,
R/O. HALE BATI GUDDADA CAMP IN DAVANAGERE TQ,
NOW @ VAGEESH NAGAR, RANEBENNUR.
2. SMT. MAHADEVAMMA @ MAHADEVAKKA,
W/O. HANUMANTAPPA MAGOD, AGE 42 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. -DO -.
3. KUM AMBRUTH H. S/O. HANUMANTAPPA MAGOD,
AGE 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. -DO-.
4. KUM ADRUSHTA S/O. HANUMANTAPPA MAGOD
AGE 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. -DO-.
5. SRI. MUTTIMANI R. B,
S/O. BHARAMAPPA, AGE MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. NIDINEGILU VILLAGE, PO. GUNDAGATTI,
TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G. S. HULMANI, ADV. FOR R1 TO R4
SRI. PRITHVIRAJ P. HITTALAMANI, ADV. FOR R5)
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
MFA No. 101817 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 101700 of 2017
MFA No. 101701 of 2017
MFA No. 101816 of 2017
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
1988, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR BY SETTING
ASIDE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 01.03.2017 PASSED
BY ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & AMACT RANEBENNUR IN M.V.C
NO.1937/2015 WITH COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE & EQUITY.
IN MFA NO. 101701 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD,
REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR, ARIHANT PLAZA,
KUSUGAL ROAD, HUBBALLI, BY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S. ARANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. GADIGEPPA S/O. MAHADEVAPPA ORAGONDADA,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE WORK,
R/O. ALADAKATTI, TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.
2. SMT. SIDDLINGAMMA @ SIDDLINGAVVA,
W/O. GADIGEPPA ORAGONDADA,
AGE 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE WORK,
R/O. ALADAKATTI, TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.
3. SRI. MUTTIMANI R. B. S/O. BHARAMAPPA
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. NIDINEGLU VILLAGE, PO. GUNDAGATTI,
TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G. S. HULMANI, ADV. FOR R1 & R2; R3-SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
1988, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR BY SETTING
ASIDE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 01.03.2017 PASSED
BY ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & AMACT RANEBENNUR IN M.V.C
NO.1938/2015 WITH COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE & EQUITY.
IN MFA NO. 101816 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. HANUMANTHAPPA S/O. NAGAPPA MAGOD,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
MFA No. 101817 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 101700 of 2017
MFA No. 101701 of 2017
MFA No. 101816 of 2017
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, NOW NIL.
2. SMT. MAHADEVAMMA @ MAHADEVAKKA,
W/O. HANUMANTHAPPA MAGOD,
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: KHOUSEHOLD WORK.
3. KUM. AMBRUTH H. S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA MAGOD,
AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT.
4. KUM. ADRUSHTA S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA MAGOD,
AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
ALL ARE R/O. HALE BATTI GUDDADA CAMP,
TQ: DAVANAGERE, NOW AT VAGEESH NAGAR,
RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581115.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. G. S. HULMANI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MUTTIMANI R. B. S/O. BHARAMAPPA,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. NIDENEGILU VILLAGE, PO. GUNDAGATTI,
TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI-581111.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE, 2ND FLOOR,
ARIHANT PLAZA, KUSUGAL ROAD,
HUBBALLI-580020.
......RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S. ARANI, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
1988, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY
ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT, RANEBENNUR AND
LEARNED JUDGE IN M.V.C NO.1937/2015 DATED 01ST MARCH 2017
AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
MFA No. 101817 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 101700 of 2017
MFA No. 101701 of 2017
MFA No. 101816 of 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL)
Though these appeals are listed for orders, with the
consent of learned counsel for the parties, they are taken up
for final disposal.
2. These appeals are filed by the claimants as well as
Insurance Company challenging the quantum of compensation
awarded under judgment and award dated 1.3.2017 passed in
MVC Nos. 1937 and 1938 of 2015 on the file of learned Addl.
Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT, Ranebennur1.
3. Brief facts leading to filing of these appeals are
that, on 23.08.2015, deceased Abhishek (MVC No.1937/2015)
was proceeding on a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-
27/U-2415 along with a pillion rider-Devendrappa (MVC
No.1938/2015) from Rattihalli towards Halageri. When they
came near Dindadahalli village on Halageri-Rattihalli road, at
that time, another motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-
27/ED-2260 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed
to the motorcycle, on which both the deceased were
'Tribunal', for short
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
proceeding. Due to the impact, both deceased rider and pillion
rider fell down and sustained grievous injuries to all over body
and succumbed to the same, while taking treatment at hospital.
Both deceased were aged about 22 years and were doing
private work, earning Rs.18,000/- per month and Rs.20,000/-
per month respectively. Hence, legal heirs of both the
deceased filed claim petitions before the Tribunal seeking
compensation for the accidental death of their sons.
4. On appearance, the respondents filed their
receptive statement of objections denying the entire claim
petition averments. Respondent No.2/Insurer contended that
the rider of the motorcycle was not holding a valid and effective
driving license as on the date of the accident. It was further
contended that the accident occurred due to the fault of the
deceased rider of the motorcycle. The compensation claimed
by the claimants is excessive and exorbitant. Thus, sought
dismissal of the claim petitions.
5. Before the Tribunal, the claimants examined two
witnesses as PW1 & PW2 and got marked 24 documents as
Ex.P1 to P24. Respondent No.2/Insurer examined its
Administrative Officer as RW1 and got marked Insurance Policy
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
as Ex.R1. The Tribunal based on the material evidence on
record, allowed the claim petitions in part and awarded total
compensation of Rs.12,54,000/- in MVC No.1937/2015 and
Rs.5,28,325/- in MVC No.1938/2015 with interest at the rate of
7.5% per annum from the date of petitions till realization.
Aggrieved by the same, the claimants as well as Insurer are in
appeal.
6. Sri. Rajashekhar S Arani, learned counsel for the
appellant/Insurance Company in support of his appeals would
contend that in MVC No.1937/2015, the Tribunal erred in
awarding excess compensation under each heads, which
requires to be reduced appropriately. He further submits that
while awarding compensation under the head of loss of
dependency, the Tribunal without properly interpreting the
decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma
& Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Another2, has
wrongly erred in adding 50% of the assessed income towards
loss of future prospects and awarded higher compensation. He
further submits that the Tribunal also committed an error in
2009 ACJ 1298
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
awarding interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, which is on
the higher side and requires to be reduced to 6% per annum.
7. Sri. Rajashekhar S Arani, learned counsel submits
that in MVC No.1938/2015, the Tribunal has rightly awarded
just and reasonable compensation under each heads, which
requires no interference at the hands of this Court. He further
submits that the Tribunal committed an error in granting higher
rate of interest on the compensation amount, which requires to
be reduced to 6% per annum. Thus, he prays for allowing both
the appeals filed by the insurer.
8. Sri.Girish S Hulmani, learned counsel for the
appellants/claimants in support of his appeals would
vehemently contend that the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal in both MVCs is on the lower side and
requires to be enhanced appropriately. He further submits that
in MVC No.1938/2015, the Tribunal having lost sight of the fact
that the father of the deceased is not a dependent of the
deceased, has erroneously come to a conclusion that the
claimants are not entitled to compensation under the head of
loss of dependency. It is further submitted that the notional
income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.7,000/-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
per month is on the lower side and it ought to have been
assessed on the higher side. Learned counsel fairly submits
that in terms of decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi &
Others3, the claimants would be entitled to an addition of 40%
of the assessed income, since both the deceased were aged
below 40 years. He further submits that in terms of Magma
General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram &
Others4, each of the claimants would be entitled to a sum of
Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium. Thus, he prays for
allowing the appeals filed by the claimants by dismissing the
appeals of the insurer.
9. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and on perusal of the appeal papers, the point that arises for
consideration in these appeals is as to, whether impugned
judgments and awards of the Tribunal call for interference at
the hands of this Court.
10. The parties to the proceedings do not dispute the
occurrence of the accident on 23.08.2015 resulting in the death
of deceased Abhishek and Devendrappa. The claimants as well
2017(16) SCC 680
2018 ACJ 2782
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
as insurer are in appeals challenging the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal. It is the contention of
the claimants in both the cases that the notional income of the
deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.7,000/- per month is
on the lower side, inasmuch as both deceased were doing
private work and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. No cogent
and acceptable evidence is placed on record to substantiate the
avocation and earnings of the deceased. In the absence of
cogent and acceptable document, this Court would assess the
notional income of both the deceased at Rs.8,000/- per month,
taking note of the notional income chart prepared by the KSLSA
for the accident of the year 2015.
11. In MVC No.1937/2015, the deceased Abhishek was
aged about 22 years as on the date of accident and appropriate
multiplier would be 18. The deceased was a bachelor, hence,
50% of the assessed income has to be deducted towards
personal expenses of the deceased. The Tribunal by
misinterpreting the decision of the Apex Court in Sarla
Verma's case supra has wrongly added 50% of the assessed
income towards future prospects. Therefore, taking note of
principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
Pranay Sethi supra, the claimants would be entitled to an
addition of 40% of the assessed income towards future
prospects. Thus, loss of dependency would be as under:
Rs.8,000 + 40/100 x 12 x 18 x 1/2 = Rs.12,09,600/-
12. Further, the claimants would be entitled to
Rs.40,000/- each under the head of loss of consortium,
besides Rs.18,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.18,000/-
towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses
including 10% escalation. Thus, the claimants would be
entitled to modified compensation as under:
Loss of dependency Rs.12,09,600/-
Loss of consortium Rs. 1,60,000/-
Loss of estate Rs. 18,000/-
Funeral expenses Rs. 18,000/-
------------------
Total Rs.14,05,600/-
------------------
Thus, the claimants in MVC No.1937/2015 would be
entitled to total compensation of Rs.14,05,600/- as against
Rs.12,54,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
13. In MVC No.1938/2015, the Tribunal having lost
sight of the fact that the father of deceased being not
dependent, the claimants would not be entitled to
compensation under the head of loss of dependency. It is well
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
settled law that the parents of the deceased either father or
mother would always depend on the income of the son, more
particularly on the elder son. Hence, the claimants being age
old parents would be entitled to compensation on the head of
loss of dependency, as the deceased was only son of the
appellants/claimants. Thus, the loss of dependency is reckoned
as under:
Rs.8,000 + 40/100 x 12 x 18 x 1/2 = Rs.12,09,600/-
14. Further, the claimants would be entitled to
Rs.40,000/- each under the head of loss of consortium,
besides Rs.18,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.18,000/-
towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses
including 10% escalation. Thus, the claimants would be
entitled to modified compensation as under:
Loss of dependency Rs.12,09,600/-
Loss of consortium Rs. 80,000/-
Loss of estate Rs. 18,000/-
Funeral expenses Rs. 18,000/-
Medical expenses Rs. 85,325/-
------------------
Total Rs.14,10,925/-
------------------
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
Thus, the claimants in MVC No.1938/2015 would be
entitled to total compensation of Rs.14,10,925/- as against
Rs.5,28,325/- awarded by the Tribunal.
15. The Tribunal has erred in awarding higher rate of
interest on the compensation amount. Taking note of present
day's bank rate of interest, we are inclined to reduce the rate of
interest from 7.5% per annum to 6% per annum on the total
compensation amount.
16. In the result, we proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
a) All the above appeals are partly allowed;
b) The impugned judgments and awards of the
Tribunal are modified holding that the claimants
in MVC No.1937/2015 would be entitled to total
compensation of Rs.14,05,600/- as against
Rs.12,54,000/- awarded by the Tribunal and
the claimants in MVC No.1938/2015 would be
entitled to total compensation of
Rs.14,10,925/- as against Rs.5,28,325/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
c) The entire compensation amount in both MVCs
shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum
from the date of claim petitions till realization.
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:11233-DB
d) The appellant/insurer shall deposit the
enhanced compensation amount with accrued
interest before the Tribunal within six weeks
from the date of receipt of certified copy of this
judgment.
e) On such deposit, the apportionment, deposit
and disbursement shall be made in terms of
award of the Tribunal.
f) The amount in deposit, if any, be transmitted to
the Tribunal forthwith.
g) Draw modified award accordingly.
h) There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
(KRISHNA S.DIXIT)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL)
JUDGE
JTR/ct-an
