Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Smt. Kavita W/O Ravi Rudrapur on 4 November, 2024
Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
MFA No. 104124 of 2023
C/W MFA No. 101770 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104124 OF 2023 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101770 OF 2024 (MV-D)
IN MFA NO. 104124 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
R/O. ANKOLA ARCADE, OPP. DISTRICT COURT,
P. B. ROAD, DHARWAD-580001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY.
Digitally ...APPELLANT
signed by
JAGADISH T
(BY SRI. S. C. BHUTI, ADVOCATE)
R
Location:
High Court of AND:
Karnataka,
Dharwad
Bench
1. SMT. KAVITA W/O. RAVI RUDRAPUR,
AGE. 27 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE,
R/O. 33, WADDAR ONI, YATTINAGUDDA,
TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD-580001.
2. MEDA D/O. RAVI RUDRAPUR,
AGE ABOUT 4 YEARS,
SINCE THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IS MINOR,
REPRESENTED BY HER MINOR GUARDIAN
MOTHER SMT. KAVITA W/O. RAVI RUDRAPUR,
R/O. 33, WADAR ONI, YATTINAGUDDA,
TQ AND DIST. DHARAD 580001.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
MFA No. 104124 of 2023
C/W MFA No. 101770 of 2024
3. YANKAPPA S/O. DASAPPA RUDRAPUR,
AGE. 57 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE,
R/O. 33, WADDAR ONI, YATTINAGUDDA,
TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD-580001.
4. SMT. HULIGEVVA W/O. YANKAPPA RUDRAPUR,
AGE. 54 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE,
R/O. 33, WADAR ONI, YATTINAGUDDA,
TQ AND DIST. DHARWAD-580001.
5. MR. AKBAR S/O. IMAMSAB TAHASILDAR,
AGE. 33 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS AND
OWNER OF THE TATA 407,
R/O. NEAR FAISAL MASJID, TOWNSHIP,
DANDELI, DIST. UTTAR KANNADA-581325.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ANJANEYA M, AND
SMT. RESHMA MADIWALAR, ADV. FOR R1, R3 & R4;
R2 IS MINOR REPTD. BY R1; NOTICE TO R5 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
1988, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED
BY THE COURT OF I ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL.
M.A.C.T, DHARWAD IN MVC NO.410/2020 DATED 01.07.2023 IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MFA NO. 101770 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. KAVITA W/O. RAVI RUDRAPUR,
AGE. 28 YEARS, OCC. HOUSE WIFE,
R/O. #33, WADDAR ONI,
YATTINAGUDDA, TQ & DIST. DHARWAD.
2. MEDA D/O. RAVI RUDRAPUR,
AGE. 04 YEARS, OCC. NIL,
SINCE MINOR, REPTD BY HER M/G
MOTHER, APPELLANT NO.1.
R/O. #33, WADDAR ONI, YATTINAGUDDA,
TQ & DIST. DHARWAD.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
MFA No. 104124 of 2023
C/W MFA No. 101770 of 2024
3. YANKAPPA S/O. DASAPPA RUDRAPUR,
AGE. 58 YEARS, OCC. COOLIE,
R/O. #33, WADDAR ONI,
YATTINAGUDDA, TQ & DIST. DHARWAD.
4. SMT. HULIGEVVA W/O YANKAPPA RUDRAPUR,
AGE. 55 YEARS, OPCC. HOUSE WIFE,
R/O. #33, WADDAR ONI, YATTINAGUDDA,
TQ & DIST. DHARWAD.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. ANJANEYA M, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MR. AKBAR S/O. IMAMSAB TAHASILDAR,
AGE. 34 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS AND
OWNER OF THE TATA 407,
R/O. NEAR FAISAL MASJID, TOWNSHIP,
DANDELI, DIST. UTTARA KANNADA.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
R/O. ANKOLA ARCADE, OPP. DISTRICT COURT,
P. B. ROAD, DHARWAD-580001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. C. BHUTI, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS HEAR THE PARTIES AND MAY
KINDLY BE MODIFIED AND ENHANCED THE COMPENSATION IN THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.07.2023 PASSED BY THE I ADDL.
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. MACT, DHARWAD, IN MVC
NO.410/2020, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COST IN THE ENDS
OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
MFA No. 104124 of 2023
C/W MFA No. 101770 of 2024
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)
These two appeals are arising out of common judgment
and award dated 01.07.2023 passed by the I Additional Senior
Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Dharwad (for short,
'Tribunal'), in MVC Nos.410/2020 and 411/2020.
2. MFA No.104124/2023 is filed by the Insurance
Company of the offending vehicle seeking reduction of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal. MFA No.101770/2024
is filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.
4. Brief facts of the claimants' case before the Tribunal
are as under:
The claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Tribunal on the ground
that the claimant No.1 is the wife of deceased, claimant No.2 is
son and claimant No.3 and 4 are the parents of the deceased
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
seeking compensation on account of death of Ravi S/o.
Yankappa Rudrapur, who died in a road traffic accident that
occurred on 10.19.2020 at about 8.45 p.m., when the
deceased and another were proceeding as rider and pillion rider
towards Dharwad from Haliyal on motorcycle bearing
registration No.KA-25/EA-4601, when they reached near
Mavinakoppa village bridge on Dharwad-Haliyal road, at that
time, the driver of TATA-407 vehicle drove the same in high
speed and in a rash and negligent manner without following
traffic rules, dashed to the motorcycle and caused accident. As
a result, the rider of the motorcycle i.e., Ravi fell down from
the motorcycle and sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot
and pillion rider sustained grievous injuries.
5. The Tribunal considering the evidence on record at
Exs.P1 to P17, oral evidence of PW1 to PW3 and granted total
compensation of Rs.33,71,000/- with interest at 6% per annum
from the date of petition till its realization.
6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company would
vehemently contend that the Tribunal has erroneously
considered the notional income of the deceased at Rs.14,500/-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
per month instead of Rs.13,750/- as per the Circular issued by
the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and granted
compensation of Rs.31,62,000/- towards loss of dependency.
a) The learned counsel further contended that the
Tribunal ought to have deducted 1/3rd towards personal
expenses of the deceased while awarding loss of dependency
instead of 1/4th, since the claimants themselves averred in their
claim petition that the father of the deceased was doing coolie
and he cannot be considered as dependent of the deceased.
b) The learned counsel further contended that the
accident occurred between two vehicles i.e, motorcycle of
deceased Ravi and TATA 407 vehicle and father of the deceased
filed complaint against unknown vehicle, even without
mentioning the type of vehicle and registration number of
vehicle, in his complaint. The counsel further contended that
there was head on collusion between motorcycle and TATA 407
vehicle, the rider of the motorcycle also contributed his
negligence. Hence, he prayed to allow the appeal filed by the
Insurance Company and dismiss the appeal filed by the
claimants.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
7. Learned counsel for the claimants contended that
the deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month by serving as
homeguard. Due to untimely death of deceased-Ravi, they have
lost sole bread earner of their family. The Tribunal has not
granted fair compensation to the claimants on all heads. The
compensation that was granted is very meager, hence, prayed
to allow the appeal filed by the claimants and prayed to dismiss
the appeal filed by the Insurance Company.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the appeal papers.
9. There is no dispute with regard to the occurrence of
the accident that occurred on 10.09.2020, due to rash and
negligent driving of driver of TATA 407 vehicle, resulting in
death of deceased Ravi and liability of the Insurance Company.
10. The very fact that when the deceased was traveling
on motorcycle along with pillion rider, he met with an accident
and died on the spot. As per the FIR, Complaint, Charge sheet,
Spot Panchanama and IMV report, the accident occurred due to
rash and negligent driving of the driver of TATA 407 vehicle and
as a result, rider of the motorcycle Ravi died and pillion rider
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
sustained injuries. The Insurance Company has not challenged
the charge sheet. Hence, the accident occurred due to
negligent act of the driver of TATA-407.
11. The claimants have stated that at the time of
accident, deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month by
serving as homeguard. Apart from oral evidence, PW1 has not
produced any documents in proof of the income of the
deceased except Ex.P.8 homeguard details and Ex.P.9
certificate issued by homeguard but, these documents do no
indicate that the monthly income of the deceased was
Rs.25,000/- per month, but it shows that he was receiving
Rs.750/- per day.
12. In order to establish this aspect, the claimants
examined one Sri. Satish Seetaram Naik as PW3. As per his
evidence, it is clear that deceased was not working regular
homeguard but he was attending for homeguard duty as and
when the department called for.
13. It is settled law that, salary is pre-determined and
fixed. Employees receive salary periodically, whereas daily
wages do not have a fixed wage, but, receive his wages on
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
daily basis, if he attends the work on a particular day.
Therefore, Ex.P8 and P9 cannot be considered as salary
certificate. Hence, in the absence of any proof in this regard,
the monthly income of the deceased is to be taken at
Rs.13,750/- instead of Rs.14,500/- as taken by the Tribunal.
As per Circular issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services
Authority as well as High Court Legal Services Committee,
Dharwad, we deem it appropriate to re-assess the notional
income of the deceased at Rs.13,750/- per month.
14. The deceased was aged about 26 years at the time
of the accident. The Insurance Company has not disputed this
aspect. As per decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Sarala Verma & Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation &
Another1, multiplier applicable to the age of the deceased is
'17'.
15. The deceased Ravi died leaving behind his wife,
children, mother and father therefore, appropriate deduction
towards personal expenses of the deceased would be 1/4th.
Thus, loss of dependency is reckoned as under:
2009 ACJ 1298
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
Rs.13,750 + 40%(Rs.5,500) = 19,250 x ¼ = Rs.4,813/-
Rs.19,250-Rs.4,813=Rs.14,437 x 12 x 17 = Rs.29,45,148/-
16. The compensation awarded against all other heads
by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and no interference is
called for by this Court in this regard. Thus, in all, the claimants
are entitled to modified compensation as under:
Loss of dependency Rs.29,45,148/-
Loss of consortium Rs. 1,76,000/-
Loss of estate Rs. 16,500/-
Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/-
------------------
Total Rs.31,54,148/-
------------------
17. Thus, the claimants are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.31,54,148/- as against Rs.33,71,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
18. In the result, we pass the following:
ORDER
a) Appeal filed by the claimants is dismissed.
b) Appeal filed by the Insurance Company is
allowed in part.
c) The impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal is modified to an extent that the
claimants are entitled to total compensation
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16107-DB
of Rs.31,54,148/- as against
Rs.33,71,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
d) The aforesaid compensation amount shall
carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum
from the date of petition till realization.
e) The Insurance Company shall deposit the
aforesaid compensation with accrued interest
before the Tribunal within six weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
f) The amount in deposit if any, be transmitted
to the Tribunal forthwith.
g) Draw modified award accordingly.
h) Registry is directed to send a copy of this
judgment to the Tribunal forthwith.
i) No order as to costs.
Sd/-
(H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
SMM/ct-an
