Karnataka High Court
K P Chikkarangaiah vs Ramazansab S/O : Hazaresab Vitnal on 8 February, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
MFA No. 21578 of 2012
C/W MFA No. 20881 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.21578 OF 2012 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.20881 OF 2013
IN M.F.A. NO.21578 OF 2012
BETWEEN:
RAMZANSAB S/O. HAZARESAB VATNAL
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: NOW NIL,
R/O: MUNAVALLI, TQ: SAUNDATTI,
DT: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI. K.P. CHIKKARANGAIAH
S/O. PUTTASWAMAIAH
DECEASED BY HIS LR'S
1(a) GIRIJAYAMMA W/O. K.P. CHIKKARANGAIAH
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: BASAVA PATTANA MAJARE
Digitally signed
by SAMREEN
SAMREEN AYUB KAREKALL PAYLYA URDAGERE
AYUB DESHNUR POST: TUMUKUR.
DESHNUR Date:
2024.02.23
16:53:08 +0530
1(b) NAVYA D/O. K.P. CHIKKARANGAIAH
AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: BASAVA PATTANA MAJARE
KAREKALL PAYLYA URDAGERE
POST: TUMUKUR.
1(c) DAKSHA S.GOUDA
D/O. NAVYA D/O. K.P. CHIKKARANGAIAH
AGE: 7 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY
NAVYA D/O. K.P. CHIKKARANGAIAH
AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: BASAVA PATTANA MAJARE
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
MFA No. 21578 of 2012
C/W MFA No. 20881 of 2013
KAREKALL PAYLYA URDAGERE
POST: TUMUKUR.
2. THE BRANCH MANGER,
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
BRANCH OFFICE TUMAKUR,
THROUGH THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI.
3. SRI. SURESH R. S/O. RANGASWAMAIAH
R/O. MINNAPUR, POST: JAKKANAHALLI,
TQ: NELAMANGALA DT: BANGALURU RURAL.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN TARIKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1(A) - R1(C)
MISS. VINAYA KUPPELLUR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. N.R. KUPPELLUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R3 SERVED)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:29-12-2011 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.2741/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, SAUNDATTI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
IN M.F.A. NO.20881 OF 2013
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI. K.P. CHIKKARANGAIAH
S/O. PUTTASWAMAIAH
DECEASED BY HIS LR'S
1(a) SMT. GIRIJAYAMMA
W/O. K.P. CHIKKARANGAIAH
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
KARKAL PALYA, KYATHASANDRA,
POST: TUMUKUR, DIST: TUMKUR-572104.
1(b) NAVYA K.C D/O. K.P. CHIKKARANGAIAH,
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
MFA No. 21578 of 2012
C/W MFA No. 20881 of 2013
1(c) KUMARI DAKSHYA S.GOUDA
D/O. SIDDARAJU,
AGE: 5 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
APPELLANT 1(c) IS A MINOR.
R/BY MINOR GUARDIAN NATURAL
MOTHER APPELLANT 1(a)
BOTH ARE R/O: B-39, OFFICERS QUARTERS,
BEML NAGAR, KGF-563115.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. PRAVEEN TARIKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. RAMZANSAB S/O. HAZARESAB VATNAL
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: MUNAVALLI, TQ: SAUNDATTI,
DT: BELAGAVI.
2. THE BRANCH MANGER,
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
BRANCH OFFICE TUMAKUR,
THROUGH THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, CLUB ROAD,
BELAGAVI.
3. SRI. SURESH S/O. RANGASWAMAIAH
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. MINNAPUR, POST: JAKKANAHALLI,
TQ: NELAMANGALA, DIST: BANGALURU RURAL.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R1
MISS. VINAYA KUPPELLUR, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. N.R. KUPPELLUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R3 SERVED)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:29-12-2011 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.2741/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, SAUNDATTI, AWARDING THE
COMPENSATION OF RS.5,78,050/- WITH INTREST AT THE RATE OF
6% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALISATION.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
MFA No. 21578 of 2012
C/W MFA No. 20881 of 2013
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard Smt.Shaila Bellikatti, Praveen Tarikar and
Vinaya Kuppelur.
2. Though the matter is listed for admission, with the
consent of the parties, matters are taken up for final
disposal.
3. Claimants appeal challenging the inadequacy of the
compensation awarded in MVC No.2741/2009 dated
29.12.2011 on the file of Prl. Senior civil Judge and Addl.
MACT, Soundantti.
4. Admitted facts for disposal of the appeal are as
under;
4.1 Claiamant being pedestrian sustained accidental
injuries on account of the rash and negligent driving of the
driver of Maxi Cab bearing No.KA-69/6945 on 30.06.2009.
He was shifted to hospital and he was treated and he has
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
sustained grievous injuries including the loss of vision in
both the eyes. He has also suffered multiple fractures and
therefore, doctor who issued the disability certificate has
assessed the disability at 100%.
4.2 Taking note of the above aspect, tribunal on contest
granted sum of Rs.5,78,050/- as compensation as under
fastening the liability on the owner Sri.K.P.Chikkarangaiah
who was the first respondent.
Sl.No. Name of heads Amount(Rs.)
1 Loss of future income 3,45,600-00
2 Pain and suffering 50,000-00
3 Loss of amenities 50,000-00
4 Medical expenses 82,428-00
5 Loss of income during laid up 25,000-00
period
6 Food, Conveyance and other 25,000-00
incidental charges
Total 5,78,050-00
5. Being aggrieved by the same, claimants are in
appeal.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
6. Smt.Shaila Bellikatti reiterating the grounds urged in
the appeal memorandum sought for enhanced
compensation by contending that the tribunal has wrongly
taken disability fact at 50% and wrongly computed the
monthly income.
7. She also contended that on the head of future
medical expenses and loss of amenities in life the award of
compensation is on lower side and sought for enchantment
of compensation.
8. Per contra, Sri.Praveen Tarikar representing the first
respondent not only supported the impugned judgment to
the extent of quantum of compensation but also
contended that as on the date of accident, he sold the
vehicle in respect of 3rd respondent namely Sri.Suresh
Rangaswamaiah and he has also placed on record 'B'
register extract with regard to the vehicle in question
whereby in the books of Regional Transport Office wherein
name of 3rd respondent is being shown as owner of the
offending vehicle. As such, first respondent ceased to be
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
the owner of the vehicle as on the date of the accident and
therefore, the liability is to be shifted on the owner of the
Maxi cab namely Sri.Suresh Rangaswamaiah.
9. The reason for fastening the liability on the owner of
the vehicle and exonerating the insurance company is
that, as on the date of the accident driver of the Maxi cab
did not possess the valid driving license, as the same has
expired and it was not renewed.
10. Miss.Vinaya Kuppellur learned counsel representing
the insurance company supported the impugned
judgment.
11. In view of the rival contentions of the parties, this
court has perused the material on record meticulously.
12. On such perusal of material on record, the accidental
injures sustained by the claimant in the road traffic
accident that occurred on 30.06.2009 involving the Maxi
cable bearing No.KA-69/6945 stands established by
placing necessary oral and documentary evidence on
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
record. Doctor who has issued the disability certificate has
assessed the disability factor at 100% in Ex.P.84 and P.85.
13. There is a total loss of vision in both the eyes,
despite the claimant taking the treatment in the eye
hospital of M.M.Joshi at Hubballi.
14. Further, on the head pain and suffering, loss of
amenities and loss of income during the laid up period
food nourishment charges needs reasonable enhancement.
15. Since, there are multiple fractures suffered by the
injured, and there is loss of vision, injured cannot indulge
himself in day to day activity without assistance of
another person. Therefore, assessing the disability at 50%
by the tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be
enhanced to 60%. Likewise, on the other heads also, a
case is made out by the claimants for enhancement of
compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
16. Injured was aged 28 years as on the date of accident
as per the material placed on record, therefore, proper
multiplier is 17 and not 16 as ordered by the tribunal.
17. Hence, quantum of compensation is reassessed as
under:
Sl.No. Name of heads Amount(Rs.)
1 Loss of future income 6,12,000-00
2 Pain and suffering 60,000-00
3 Loss of amenities 60,000-00
4 Medical expenses 82,428-00
5 Loss of income during laid up 35,000-00
period
6 Food, Conveyance and other 35,000-00
incidental charges
Total 8,84,428-00
18. Insofar as appeal by the erstwhile owner first
respondent of the Maxi cab Sri.K.P.Chikkarangaiah, no
material evidence is placed on record before the tribunal
so as to transfer of vehicle to the Suresh who is 3rd
respondent in the claim petition.
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
19. However, 'B' register extract is placed before this
court which would clearly establish that as on the date of
accident, vehicle was transferred in the name of 3rd
respondent Sri. Suresh and therefore, first respondent
K.P.Chikkarangaiah who is the owner of the maxi cab in
question, tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that
as on the date of accident, the driver of the Maxi Cab did
not posses valid driving license inasmuch as driving license
has expired long back and same was not renewed.
20. Accordingly, it is the responsibility of the owner to
pay the compensation as there was a clear violation of the
policy condition.
21. Therefore, liability fastened on the first respondent
needs to be shifted to Sri. Suresh who is third respondent
in the claim petition. It is pertinent to note that third
respondent did not choose to contest the claim petition
before the trial court nor appeal before this court despite
service of notice.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2847
22. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
i) Appeal filed by the claimant in MFA
No.21578/2012 is allowed.
ii) As against compensation in a sum of
Rs.5,78,050/-, claimant is entitled for
compensation in a sum of Rs.8,84,428/- with
interest at 6% per annum from the date of
petition till realization, recoverable from 3rd
respondent.
iii) Consequently, appeal filed by the first
respondent in MFA No.20881/2013 is
allowed. Liability fastened on the first
respondent is set aside and the liability is
shifted to the 3rd respondent Sri.Suresh .
iv) Amount in deposit made by the appellant is
ordered to be returned to appellant in MFA
No.20881/2013 under due identification.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HMB
