Karnataka High Court
Royal Sundaram Alliance vs Sadanand on 16 January, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:956
MFA No. 103739 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 103738 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103739 OF 2016 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103738 OF 2016
IN M. F. A. NO.103739 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE
INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
SUNDARAM TOWERS, 45 AND 46 WHITES ROAD,
CHENNAI-600014, REGISTERED OFFICE 21,
PATULLOS ROAD, CHENNAI-600002.
NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
SUBRAMANIAN BUILDING,
II FLOOR, NO.1, CLUB HOUSE ROAD,
Digitally signed
by SAMREEN ANNASALAI, CHENNAI-600002.
AYUB
DESHNUR
Date:
2024.02.01
14:30:27 +0530 ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI. SADANAND
S/O. APPASAB SARWAD,
AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: HIDAKAL, TALUK: RAIBAG,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:956
MFA No. 103739 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 103738 of 2016
2. SHRI. BASAPPA M. KOTYAL,
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: C/O. M. PATTANSHETTI,
APMC-2ND GATE, INDI ROAD,
VIJAYAPURA.
(OWNER OF L AND T JCB BEARING
REGISTRATION NO.KA-28/N-1620)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. KRISHNAKUMAR JOSHI, ADVOCATE;
R2 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED: 27.08.2016, PASSED IN
MVC.NO.509/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL RAIBAG, AWARDING THE
COMPENSATION OF RS.18,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE
OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE FINAL
REALISATION.
IN M. F. A. NO.103738 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE
INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
SUNDARAM TOWERS, 45 AND 46 WHITES ROAD,
CHENNAI-600014, REGISTERED OFFICE 21,
PATULLOS ROAD, CHENNAI-600002.
NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
SUBRAMANIAN BUILDING,
II FLOOR, NO.1, CLUB HOUSE ROAD,
ANNASALAI, CHENNAI-600002.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE)
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:956
MFA No. 103739 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 103738 of 2016
AND:
1. SHRI. GANAPATI
S/O. BALAPPA @ BABU BHOSALE,
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE
@ DIGGING WORK, NOW NIL,
R/O: HIDAKAL, TALUK: RAIBAG,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
2. SHRI. BASAPPA M. KOTYAL,
AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: C/O. M. PATTANSHETTI,
APMC-2ND GATE, INDI ROAD,
VIJAYAPURA.
(OWNER OF L AND T JCB BEARING
REGISTRATION NO.KA-28/N-1620)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. KRISHNAKUMAR JOSHI, ADVOCATE;
R2 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED: 27.08.2016, PASSED IN
MVC.NO.510/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL RAIBAG, AWARDING THE
COMPENSATION OF RS.4,59,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE
RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE
FINAL REALISATION.
THESE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS, COMING ON
FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:956
MFA No. 103739 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 103738 of 2016
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.S.K.Kayakmath and Sri.Krishna Kumar
Joshi, counsel.
2. Though the matters are listed for orders, with the
consent of the parties, matter is taken up for final
disposal.
3. These two appeals arise out of the judgment and
award passed in MVC No.509/2013 and MVC No.510/2013
dated 27.08.2016 on the file of Addl. MACT, Raibag,
Belagavi district.
4. Brief facts which are utmost necessary for disposal of
the appeals are as under:
4.1 In respect of injuries sustained in road traffic
accident that occurred on 15.10.2011 at about 12 noon,
the rider and pillion rider of motorcycle bearing No.KA-
23/EA 1873 laid claim before the motor accident claim
tribunal. The road traffic accident has occurred on account
of the improper, rash and negligent driving of the earth
NC: 2024:KHC-D:956
mover namely L &T JCB bearing No.KA-28/N-1620. Police
after thorough investigation filed charge sheet against the
driver of the said earth mover.
4.2 Tribunal on consideration of the objections and
evidence placed on record, allowed the claim petition in a
sum of Rs.18,000/- in respect of injured Sadashiva and
sum of Rs.4,59,000/- in respect of injured Ganapathi.
Insurance company was directed to pay the compensation.
4.3 Being aggrieved by the same, insurance company is
in appeal.
5. Sri.S.K.Kayakmath, counsel for appellant reiterating
the grounds urged in both the appeals sought for allowing
the appeals by holding that the driver of the earth mover
did not posses valid driving license or endorsement for
driving the earth mover.
6. He also contended that the quantum of compensation
in respect of the injured Ganapathi is on higher side
inasmuch as monthly income is assessed in a sum of
NC: 2024:KHC-D:956
Rs.7,500/-, in the absence of any formal proof for
accidental injuries that occurred in the year 2011, it
should have been taken at Rs.6,000/- per month and
sought for allowing the appeal.
7. Per contra, Sri.Krishna Kumar Joshi appearing for
claimants in both the matters supported the impugned
judgments.
8. In view of the rival contentions of the parties, this
court has perused the material available on record
meticulously.
9. On such perusal of the material available on record,
rider and pillion rider of motorcycle bearing No.KA-23/EA-
1873 sustaining injuries in the road traffic accident
involving earth mover i.e. JCB bearing No.KA-28/N-1620
has been established by placing necessary material
evidence on record.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:956
10. In the case of injured Sadashiva, tribunal has
awarded compensation of Rs.18,000/- taking note of the
fact that the injured has sustained simple injuries.
11. But, in the case of Sri.Ganapathi, tribunal has
awarded sum of Rs.4,59,000/-, while so assessing
compensation, tribunal has taken into consideration the
income of the injured at Rs.7,500/- p.m. whereas it should
have been sum of Rs.6,000/- per month for the accidental
injuries for the year 2011, in the absence of proper income
proof.
12. Therefore, a case is made out by the insurance
company for the purpose of reassessing the quantum of
compensation. However, on the head of pain and suffering
only a sum of Rs.10,000/-is granted and on the head
nourishment charges only a sum of Rs.5,000/- is granted
and loss of income during the laid pup period is also
granted on the lower side. Instead of enhancing
compensation on those heads and reducing from the head
loss of future income by taking monthly notional income at
NC: 2024:KHC-D:956
Rs.6,000/- p.m. from Rs.7,500/-, a sum of Rs.59,000/- is
reduced from the quantum of compensation and
reassessing the compensation in a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-
as against Rs.4,59,000/- would meet the ends of justice,
having regard to the fact that the claim petitions are of the
year 2013 for the accidental injuries of 2011.
13. This would take us to the next question, whether the
insurance company is liable to pay the compensation as
ordered by the tribunal and challenged by the insurance
company.
14. The issue with regard to non-possessing a proper
endorsement in the driving license and thereby the
insurance company can avoid the payment of
compensation is no more res-integra.
15. In the case of Mukund Dewangan vs. Oriental
Insurance Company Limited reported in AIR 2017 SC
3668, the Hon'ble Apex Court has ruled that mere non
endorsement in the driving license would not absolve the
liability of the insurance company.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:956
16. Following the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of Mukund Dewangan supra, the insurance
company is bound to pay compensation as the driver did
possess the license to drive light motor vehicle and
moreover, the earth mover is having number plate (white
board) as if then exists.
17. In view of the foregoing discussions, the following:
ORDER
i) MFA No.103739/2016 is dismissed.
ii) MFA No.103738/2011 is allowed in part. As
against compensation of Rs.4,59,000/- awarded
by the tribunal, the claimant would be entitled
for Rs.4,00,000/- with 6% interest per annum
from the date of petition till realization.
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:956
iii) Amount in deposit is ordered to be
transmitted to the tribunal for disbursement in
accordance with law.
iv) Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HMB
