Karnataka High Court
Smt. Santa W/O Arjun Shivangekar vs Shri. Avinash S/O Irappa Bhadange on 31 July, 2024
Author: Krishna S.Dixit
Bench: Krishna S.Dixit
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
MFA No. 101724 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101724 OF 2017 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SANTA
W/O. ARJUN SHIVANGEKAR,
SINCE DECEASED R/BY. HER LR'S
THE APPELLANT NO. 2 TO 5 ARE THE ONLY
LEGAL HEIRS OF THE APPELLANT NO.1,
AND THEY ARE ALREADY ON RECORD.
2. SHRI. SRINIVAS
S/O. ARJUN SHIVANGEKAR,
AGE 33 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
(NOW PRIVATE WORK), R/O. HOUSE NO.1783,
Digitally SHRINATH NAGAR, VENGURLA ROAD,
signed by
JAGADISH T R HINDALAGA, BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591108.
Location:
High Court of
Karnataka 3. SHRI. SUHAS
Dharwad
Bench S/O. ARJUN SHIVANGEKAR,
AGE 30 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. HOUSE NO.1783, SHRINATH NAGAR,
VENGURLA ROAD, HINDALAGA,
BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591108.
4. SMT. SUREKHA
W/O. GANESH SHINDE,
AGE 27 YEARS,
OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. C/O. RANGRAO SHRIPATI SHINDE,
R.S.NO.1210/1, PLOT NO.3,
ASHOK COLONY, NEAR LAXTIRTH VASAHAT,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
MFA No. 101724 of 2017
KOLHAPUR, STATE: MAHARASHTRA,
PIN CODE: 416001.
5. SHRI. SUBODH
S/O. ARJUN SHIVANGEKAR,
AGE 25 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
R/O. C/O. RANGRAO SHRIPATI SHINDE,
R.S.NO.1210/1, PLOT NO.3,
ASHOK COLONY, NEAR LAXTIRTH VASAHAT,
KOLHAPUR, STATE: MAHARASHTRA,
PIN CODE: 416001.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SANJAY S. KATAGERI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI. AVINASH
S/O. IRAPPA BHADANGE,
AGE MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS,
R/O. A/P: BEKKINKERI,
TQ & DIST. BELAGAVI,
PIN CODE: 591128.
2. THE DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
P. B. NO.1568, SITA SMRUTI, MARUTI GALLI,
BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 590002.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. R. R. MANE, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES
ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
23.09.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.1595/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE X
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING ON INTERLOCUTORY
APPLICATION, 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
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
MFA No. 101724 of 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)
This appeal is filed by the claimants seeking for
enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the
judgment and award dated 23.09.2016 passed in
MVC.No.1595/2015 by the X Addl. District and Sessions
Judge and Member Addl.MACT., Belagavi (for short,
'Tribunal').
2. Brief facts leading to filing this appeal are that
on 17.11.2014 one Sri.Arjun Tukaram Shivangekar was
coming to his house by walk, at that time, the rider of
Bajaj Tempo Cab bearing registration No.KA-22/8859
came in a rash and negligent manner and lost control over
the cab and dashed to the said Arjun from back side and
caused the accident. Due to the impact, Arjun sustained
fatal and grievous injuries and died at KLE Hospital,
Belagavi. The appellants being wife and children of the
deceased Arjun filed claim petition seeking compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
3. The respondents entered appearance before the
Tribunal and opposed the claim petition.
4. The Tribunal after considering the evidence
available on record, allowed the claim petition in part and
awarded total compensation of Rs.2,65,300/- along with
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of
petition till realization of the amount and held respondent
No.1/owner of the offending vehicle to pay the
compensation amount. Being aggrieved by the same, the
appellants have filed present appeal seeking enhancement
of compensation.
5. Sri. Sanjay Katageri, learned counsel appearing
for the appellants/claimants submits that the Tribunal has
committed grave error in assessing the income of the
deceased at Rs.5,000/- per month which is contrary to the
pleading on record. He further submits that the Tribunal
has committed further grave error in deducting 50%
towards personal expenses of the deceased instead of
1/4th as the number of claimants are five in number. He
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
required to be re-determined. Learned counsel further
submits that the Tribunal has committed grave error in
directing the respondent No.1/owner of the offending
vehicle to pay the compensation. Thus, he seeks to allow
the appeal.
6. Per contra, Sri.R.R.Mane, learned counsel
appearing for respondent No.2/Insurance Company
supports the impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal and submits that the Tribunal taking note of the
evidence available on record, has awarded just and
appropriate compensation which does not call for any
enhancement. Thus, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.
7. We have heard the arguments of the learned
counsel for the parties. Meticulously perused the material
available on record.
8. The parties to the proceedings do not seriously
dispute that Sri.Arjun Takaram Shivangekar husband of
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
appellant No.1 and father of other appellants met with an
accident and died. In support of the claim, appellant No.2
examined himself as PW1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P9 in
support of the case however, no evidence was placed on
record with regard to the income of the deceased. In the
absence of any evidence with regard to the income of the
deceased, this Court normally relies on the notional
income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal
Services Authority and placing reliance on the said chart,
this Court reassesses the notional income of the deceased
at Rs.7,500/- per month as the accident that occurred in
the year 2014.
9. Admittedly, the deceased was 62 years at the
time of the accident and the Tribunal has rightly applied
multipler of '7'.
10. As the legal heirs of the deceased are five in
numbers, the appropriate deduction would be 1/4th as
against 50% deducted by the Tribunal towards personal
and living expenses of the deceased. Thus, the claimants
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
would be entitled for modified compensation on the head
of loss of dependency as under:
Rs.7,500x 12 x 7 x 3/4 = Rs.4,72,500/-
11. This Court taking note of the law laid down by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General
Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram & Others1 the
claimants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each except
appellant No.1 who died during the pendency of the appeal
under the head of loss of consortium and as per the law
laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi &
Others2, the claimants are entitled to Rs.15,000/- under
the head of 'loss of estate' and Rs.15,000/- under the
head of 'transportation of dead body and funeral
expenses'. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to
modified compensation on the following heads:
2018 ACJ 2782
2017(16) SCC 680
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
Particulars Amount
(in Rs.)
Loss of dependency 4,72,500/-
Loss of estate 15,000/-
Funeral expenses 15,000/-
Loss of consortium (Rs.40,000 X 4 1,60,000/-
dependants)
Medical expenses 5,252/-
Total 6,67,752/-
12. Insofar as the contention of the learned counsel
appearing for the appellants that the Tribunal has
committed grave error in directing the respondent
No.1/owner of the offending vehicle to pay the
compensation is concerned, the said submission is
required to be accepted. Taking note of the law laid down
by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of SHAMANNA AND
ANOTHER Vs. DIVISIONAL MANAGER ORIENTAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS3, this Court
is of the considered view that the Insurance Company is
required to pay the compensation amount to the claimants
and recover the same from the owner of the offending
(2018) 9 SCC 650
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
vehicle. It would be useful to refer the relevant paragraph
of the aforesaid judgment for the purpose of ready
reference, which reads as under:
"13. Since the reference to the larger Bench in Parvathneni
case (National Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Parvathneni, (2009) 8
SCC 785 (2009) 3 SCC (Civ) 568 : (2009) 3 SCC (Cri) 943)
has been disposed of by keeping the questions of law open to
be decided in an appropriate case, presently the decision in
Swaran Singh case³ followed in Laconi Narain Dhut and other
cases hold the field. The award passed by the Tribunal
directing the insurance company awarded to the claimants and
thereafter, recover the same from the owner of the vehicle in
question, is in accordance with the judgment passed by this
Court in Swaran Singh and Laxmi Narain Dhut cases. While so,
in our view, the High Court ought not to have interfered with
the award passed by the Tribunal directing the first respondent
to pay and recover from the owner of the vehicle The
impugned judgment of the High Court exonerating the
insurance company from its liability and directing the claimants
to recover the compensation from the owner of the vehicle is
set aside and the award passed by the Tribunal restored."
13. Keeping in mind the aforesaid enunciation of
law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court, this Court directs
respondent No.2/Insurance Company to pay the entire
compensation amount along with interest to the
appellants/claimants and liberty is granted to it to recover
the same from respondent No.1/owner of the offending
vehicle.
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
14. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to total
compensation of Rs.6,67,752/- as against Rs.2,65,300/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
15. In the result, we proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
a) Appeal stands allowed in part.
b) The impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal is modified to an extent that the
claimants would be entitled to total
compensation of Rs.6,67,752/- as
against Rs.2,65,300/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
c) The enhanced compensation amount shall
carry interest at the rate of 6% per
annum from the date of petition till the
date of payment.
d) Respondent No.2/Insurance Company to
pay the entire compensation amount
along with interest to the
appellants/claimants within six weeks
from the date of receipt of certified copy
of this judgment and liberty is granted to
it to recover the same from respondent
No.1/owner of the offending vehicle.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:10750-DB
e) Apportionment, deposit and disbursement
shall be made as per the award of the
Tribunal.
f) Draw modified award accordingly.
In view of the disposal of the main appeal,
pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not
survive for consideration.
Sd/-
(KRISHNA S.DIXIT)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL)
JUDGE
RH/ct-an
