Karnataka High Court
Shivarudrayya vs Jayachandra J on 21 February, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4286
MFA No. 24292 of 2013
C/W MFA No. 23659 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.24292 OF 2013 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.23659 OF 2013
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.24292 OF 2013
BETWEEN:
1. SRI. SHIVARUDRAYYA
S/O. ANDANAYYA HIREMATH,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: KULAMANATTI, NOW RESIDING AT
SANGOLLI, TQ: BAILHONGAL,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS
1a) BASAVA W/O. SHIVARUDRAYYA HIREMATH
Digitally
AGE: 65 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
signed by
SAMREEN
R/O: SANGOLI, TQ: BAILHONGAL,
SAMREEN AYUB
AYUB DESHNUR DIST: BELAGAVI.
DESHNUR Date:
2024.02.23
16:35:44
+0530 1b) VIJAY S/O. SHIVARUDRAYYA HIREMATH,
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O: SANGOLI, TQ: BAILHONGAL,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
1c) MAHESH S/O. SHIVARUDRAYYA HIREMATH,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O: SANGOLI, TQ: BAILHONGAL,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. BASAVARAJ MATHAPATHI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR 1(A) - (C))
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4286
MFA No. 24292 of 2013
C/W MFA No. 23659 of 2013
AND:
1. SRI. JAYACHNDRA J.
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: #530/39, 10TH C(E) MAIN,
6TH BLOCK, RAJAJI NAGAR,
BANGALURU-560 010.
2. THE MANAGER,
HDFC GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
6TH FLOOR, LEELA BUSINESS PARK,
ANDHERI-KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI (E) MUMBAI.
3. SMT. NEELAMBIKA
W/O. MAHANTHAYYA KADAYYANAVARMATH,
@ KADANNAVAR,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: KULAMANATTI, TQ: BAILHONGAL,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
4. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
MAIN ROAD, OPPOSITE S.T. STAND,
GADAHINGLAJ.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. CHETAN HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. UMESH AINAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI. R.R. MANE, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD: 28.02.2013, PASSED IN MVC
NO.1564/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
ADDL. MACT BAILHONGAL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4286
MFA No. 24292 of 2013
C/W MFA No. 23659 of 2013
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.23659 OF 2013
BETWEEN:
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER,
MAIN ROAD, OPP: S.T.STAND,
BAILHONGAL, HEREWITH REPRESENTED
BY UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SEETA SMRUTHI,
MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
SR. DIVISIONAL MANAGER.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. R.R. MANE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SHRI. SHIVARUDRAYYA ANDANAYYA HIREMATH,
AGE: 52 YRS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. KULAMANATTI, TQ: BAILHONGAL,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
2. SHRI. JAYACHANDRA J.,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. # 530/39, 10TH C(E) MAIN, 6TH BLOCK,
RAJAJI NAGAR, BANGALURU-560 010
(OWNER OF MARUTI SUZUKI SWIFT
CAR NO.KA-02/MD-8358)
3. THE MANAGER,
HDFC GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
6TH FLOOR, LEELA BUSINESS PARK,
ANDHERI-KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI (E),
MUMBAI.
(INSURER OF MARUTI SUZUKI SWIFT
CAR NO.KA-02/MD-8358)
(POLICY NO.231100026754900000,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4286
MFA No. 24292 of 2013
C/W MFA No. 23659 of 2013
VALID FROM 18/09/2010 TO 17/9/2011)
4. SMT. NEELAMBIKA
W/O. MAHANTHAYYA KADAYYANAVARMATH
@ KADANNAVAR,
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. KULAMANATTI, TQ:BAILHONGAL,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
(LEGAL HEIR OF OWNER OF BAJAJ
M-80 MOTORCYCLE NO.KA-24/E-3419)
..RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. BASAVARAJ MATHAPATHI, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. H.M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. CHETAN HIREMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI. UMESH AINAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:28-02-2013
PASSED IN MVC NO.1564/2011 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, BAILHONGAL, AWARDING
THE COMPENSATION OF RS.79,800/-WITH INTEREST AT THE
RATE OF 6% P.A., SHALL BE DEPOSITED WITHIN SIX MONTHS
FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4286
MFA No. 24292 of 2013
C/W MFA No. 23659 of 2013
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.Basavaraj Mathapathi, learned counsel
representing Sri.H.M.Dharigond, learned counsel for the
appellants, Sri.Chetan Hiremath, learned counsel for
respondent No.1, Sri.S.K.Kayakamath, learned counsel for
the respondent No.2, Sri.Umesh Ainapur, learned counsel
for respondent No.3 and Sri.R.R. Mane, learned counsel
for respondent No.4.
2. Present appeals are filed by the claimant as well
as Insurance Company of the motorcycle bearing
No.KA.24/E.3419, challenging the validity of the judgment
and award passed in MVC No.1564/2011 dated
28.02.2013 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and Additional
MACT, Bailhongal.
3. Brief facts of the case are as under:
Claimant being a pillion rider suffered accidental
injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred on
23.04.2011 at about 5.00 a.m. on P.B. Road, involving a
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4286
motorcycle bearing No.KA.24/E.3419 and Maruthi Suzuki
Swift car bearing No.KA.02/MD-8358.
4. Claim petition, on contest, came to be allowed
in a sum of Rs.1,59,600/- as under:
1. Pain and suffering Rs.40,000/-
2. Medical and Hospital Rs.14,500/-
charges
3. Nourishment charges Rs.5,000/-
4. Attendant and conveyance Rs.5,000/-
5. Loss of income during Rs.10,500/-
treatment period
6. Loss of future income Rs.54,600/-
7. Loss of amenities, future Rs.30,000/-
unhappiness
TOTAL Rs.1,59,600/-
50% deduction Rs. 79,800/-
Rs. 79,800/-
5. Tribunal saddled the liability on the rider of the
motorcycle and the driver of the car in the ratio of 50:50,
as the charge sheet was filed against both the rider and
driver of the Maruthi Suzuki Swift Car.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4286
6. Being aggrieved by the fastening of liability on
the Insurance Company of the motorcycle, Insurance
Company is in appeal.
7. Being aggrieved by the quantum of
compensation, claimant is in appeal.
8. Sri.Basavaraj Mathapatti, learned counsel
representing Sri.H.M.Dharigond, learned counsel for the
appellants vehemently contended that the Tribunal has not
awarded the proper and appropriate quantum of
compensation and sought for allowing the appeal.
9. He also contended that fastening 50% of the
liability on the rider of the motorcycle is incorrect and
entire negligence should have been attributed to the driver
of the car and sought for passing appropriate orders.
10. Per contra, Sri.S.K.Kayakamath, learned
counsel representing respondent No.2/Insurance Company
of the motorcycle contended that since the pillion rider is
not covered under the policy held by the rider/owner of
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4286
the motorcycle, fastening liability to the extent of 50% by
the adjudged compensation is to be enhanced.
11. Insofar as quantum of compensation is
concerned, learned counsel representing Insurance
Company of both the vehicles supported the impugned
judgment.
12. Having heard the parties in detail, this Court
perused the material on record meticulously.
13. On such perusal of the material on record,
accidental injuries sustained by the claimant is established
by placing necessary oral and documentary evidence on
record.
14. Taking note of the fact that the charge sheet
came to be filed against the rider of the motorcycle as well
as on the driver of the car apportioning the compensation
in the ratio of 50:50 is justifiable in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4286
15. Admittedly, the claimant is a pillion rider.
Therefore, the policy obtained by the owner of the
motorcycle did not cover the risk of the pillion rider.
Accordingly, the Insurance Company of the motorcycle
needs to be exonerated from paying 50% of the liability
and the said amount is recoverable by the injured pillion
rider from the owner of the motorcycle.
16. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is
concerned, the Tribunal has awarded sum of
Rs.1,59,600/-.
17. Taking note of the injuries sustained and the
monthly income that has been reckoned and also the
disability factor and the award amount on the head of
nourishment and attendant charges, this Court is of the
considered opinion that enhancing the compensation in a
sum of Rs.75,000/- would meet the ends of justice,
instead of reassessing the quantum of compensation.
18. Accordingly, following:
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4286
ORDER
i. Appeal filed by the claimant is allowed in part
as against sum of Rs.1,59,700/-, claimant is
entitled to a sum of Rs.2,34,700/- with
interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till
its realisation.
ii. 50% of the said compensation amount is
payable by the Insurance Company of the car
and 50% of the said compensation is
recoverable by the claimant from the owner of
the motorcycle bearing No.KA.24/E.3419.
iii. Consequently, appeal filed by the Insurance
Company of the motorcycle in MFA
No.23659/2013 is allowed.
iv. Amount in deposit is ordered to be refunded to
the appellant in MFA No.23659/2013.
v. In view of the disposal of the appeal,
I.A.No.3/2013 is consigned to records as no
further orders are necessary.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KAV
