Karnataka High Court
The Branch Manager vs Sri Mahesh S/O Pandu Moger on 14 February, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3659
MFA No. 105393 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.105393 OF 2023 (MV)
BETWEEN:
THE BRANCH MANAGER,
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
THE BR. OFFICE, BUNDAR ROAD,
TALUK BHATKAL,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
DIVISION MANAGER,
(INSURER OF MOTOR CYCLE
BEARING NO.KA-47/W-4799)
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S.S. KOLIWAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SAMREEN
1. SRI. MAHESH S/O. PANDU MOGER,
AYUB AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
DESHNUR
Digitally signed
by SAMREEN
AYUB DESHNUR 2. KUMARI. LATA D/O PANDU MOGER,
Date: 2024.02.22
16:49:33 +0530
AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
3. KUMAR. ABISHEK S/O. PANDU MOGER,
AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
4. SRI. MADEV S/O. APPI MOGER,
AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
5. SMT. MOHINI W/O. MADEV MOGER,
AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3659
MFA No. 105393 of 2023
6. KUMARI. GEETA D/O. MADEV MOGER,
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
(RESPONDENT NO.3 HEREIN IS
MINOR REPRESENTED BY THEIR
NATURAL GUARDIAN RESPONDENT NO.1)
ALL ARE R/O: TALMAKKI, MANKI,
NOW AT R/O: KOPPADMAKKI, BAILURU,
TQ. BHATKAL, PIN-581350.
7. SRI. HEMACHANDRA JATGA MOGER,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: KAMTIMANE, MATHADHITTLU,
KAIKINI VILLAGE, TQ BHATKAL,
PIN-581421.
(OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KA-47/W-4799)
...RESPONDENTS
(R1 TO R7 SERVED;
R3 IS MINOR REP. BY R1)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLE ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 09.06.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.297/2022 ON THE FILE
OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AND MEMBER,
ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-BHATKAL,
AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.19,50,000/- WITH
INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION
TILL ITS REALIZATION.
THIS M.F.A., COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3659
MFA No. 105393 of 2023
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.S.S.Koliwad, learned counsel for the
appellant.
2. Respondents though served with the notice of
appeal, remain unrepresented.
3. Though the matter is listed for admission, with the
consent of counsel for appellant, matter is taken up for
final disposal.
4. Facts in brief are as under:
4.1. Claim petition came to be filed by the claimants who
are dependants of Smt.Baby W/o Pandu Moger.
4.2 Smt. Baby W/o Pandu Moger was traveling has pillion
rider in motorcycle bearing No.KA-47/W-4799 on
08.11.2021 at about 9.30 a.m. on account of rash and
negligent driving of the motorcycle rider met with accident
and Smt.Baby was shifted to Hospital at Manki and she
was declared as brought dead.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3659
4.3 On contest, the claim petition came to be allowed in
a sum of Rs.19,50,000/- with 6% interest from the date of
petition till realization.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that
there is improper appreciation of material on record and
instead of deducting 1/3, tribunal has deducted ¼ of the
monthly income and therefore, sought for reassessment of
the compensation.
6. In the light of the argument put forth on behalf of
the appellant, this court has perused the material on
record meticulously.
7. On such perusal of the material on record, it is seen
that there are six claimants and they are entitled for
Rs.40,000/- each on the ground of filial consortium and
they are also entitled for Rs.30,000/- under conventional
head.
8. No doubt, monthly income is to be taken in a sum of
Rs.14,250/- and ¼ is deducted, tribunal has not added
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3659
any amount under the head future loss of income as per
the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay
Sethi and Others reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157. If
same is added, claimants are entitled for enhancement
compensation.
9. Therefore, there is no scope for interference with the
order of tribunal, in the absence of any appeal by the
claimants.
10. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
i) Appeal is merit less and is hereby dismissed.
ii) Amount in deposit is ordered to be
transmitted to the tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HMB
