Karnataka High Court
The Manager vs Narayanaswamy K S on 5 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
MFA No. 715 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 5780 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.715 OF 2021 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5780 OF 2021(MV-D)
IN MFA No. 715 OF 2021:
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGER
M/S BAJAJ ALLIANZ GIC LTD.
NO.31, GROUND FLOOR,
TBR TOWER, 1ST CROSS,
NEW MISSION ROAD,
NEXT TO JAIN COLLEGE
AND BANGALORE STOCK EXCHANGE
JC ROAD, BANGALORE-560 002
NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS,
THE MANAGER,
Digitally signed M/S BAJAJ ALLIANZ GIC LTD.
by AASEEFA
NO.1/2, GOLDEN HEIGHTS
PARVEEN
4TH FLOOR, 59TH C CROSS
Location: HIGH 4TH M BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR,
COURT OF BANGALORE-10
KARNATAKA ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NARAYANASWAMY K. S.,
S/O LATE KONAPPA,
NOW AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
2. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVI,
W/O NARAYANASWAMY,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
MFA No. 715 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 5780 of 2021
NOW AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
3. MAHESH M. N.,
S/O NARAYANSWAMY,
NOW AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 3 ARE
R/O. C/O. NAGARATHNAMMA
NO. 51(1) GIS 2062,
3RD CROSS, 8TH MAIN,
HONGASANDRA,
BANGALORE- 560 068.
4. M/S. VAIBHAV MINING PVT. LTD.
DEEP NAGAR, UTTARMOHAL
ROBERTSGANI, SONEBHADRA,
UTTAR PRADESH-916 067.
5. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.
REGIONAL OFFICE AT BANGALORE
THE REGIONAL MANAGER,
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.,
RO-TP-HUB, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS,
M. G. ROAD, BANGALORE-1.
6. CHITTI BABU GANDI,
S/O. NOOKALU
R/AT DOOR NO.5-122
JODOGULLA VILLAGE
SABBAVARAM-530 036
ANDHRA PRADESH.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAMESH GOWDA M. K., ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
SMT. GEETHA RAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
R3 AND R6 ARE SERVED;
V/O. DATED 06.08.2024 NOTICE TO R4 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.01.2020 PASSED IN
MVC NO.50/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
MFA No. 715 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 5780 of 2021
AND JMFC CHINTAMANI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF
RS.23,88,800/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE
DATE OF PETITION TILL THE AMOUNT IS DEPOSITED WITH
THE TRIBUNAL.
IN MFA NO. 5780 OF 2021:
BETWEEN:
M/S THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
REGIONAL OFFICE AT BANGALORE,
THE REGIONAL MANAGER,
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,
RO-TP-HUB, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS,
M. G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001,
REPRESENTED BY MR. K T VARDHARAJAN,
ASSISTANT MANAGER
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. GEETHA R.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MR. NARAYANASWAMY K. S.,
S/O LATE KONAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
2. SMT. LAKSHMIDEVI,
W/O NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
3. MR. MAHESH M. N.,
S/O NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO NO. 3 ARE
RESIDING AT C/O NAGARATHNAMMA,
NO 51(1) GIS 2062, 3RD CROSS, 8TH MAIN,
HONGASANDRA, BANGALORE - 560 068.
4. M/S VAIBHAV MINING PVT. LTD.,
DEEP NAGAR, UTTARMOHAL,
ROBERTSGABI, SONEBHADRA,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
MFA No. 715 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 5780 of 2021
UTTARPRADESH - 916 067.
5. MR. CHITTI BABU GANDI,
S/O NOOKDALU,
RESIDING AT DOOR NO. 5-122,
JODOGULLA VILLAGE, SABBAVARAM,
SABBAVARAM - 530 036.
6. M/S BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
REGIONAL OFICE AT NO 31,
GROUND FLOOR, TBR TOWER, 1ST CROSS,
NEW MISSION ROAD,
NEXT TO JAIN COLLEGE,
AND BANGALORE STOCK EXCHANGE,
J C ROAD, BANGALORE - 560002
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAMESH GOWDA M K.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3;
SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R6;
NOTICE TO R4 AND R5 ARE DISPENSED WITH,
V/O. DATED 19.09.2024)
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.01.2020 PASSED IN
MVC NO. 50/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND JMFC, CHINTHAMANI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF
RS.23,88,800/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE
DATE OF PETITION TILL THE AMOUNT IS DEPOSITED WITH
THE TRIBUNAL.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
MFA No. 715 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 5780 of 2021
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
Both the appeals arise out of the order that is
rendered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Chintamani in MVC No.50/2014 dated 17.01.2020.
2. Heard Sri.Pradeep.B learned counsel for the
appellant in MFA No.715/2021, Smt.Geetha Raj, learned
counsel for the appellant in MFA No.5780/2021 and
Sri.Ramesh Gowda.M.K, learned counsel who represents
the claimants in both the appeals.
3. The facts of the case in nutshell as projected by
the claimants before the Tribunal are that on 09.11.2011
while the deceased M.N.Girish (herein after be referred to
as 'the deceased' for brevity) was driving a van bearing
registration No.KA-51-A-0720 and was proceeding with
tomato load, when the vehicle reached near Petropark,
Airport junction, Vishakapatnam, a lorry bearing
registration No.UP-64-H-7270 driven by its driver in a rash
and negligent manner dashed against the van of the
deceased and likewise a lorry bearing registration No.AP-
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
31-TW-3479 also dashed against the van from back side,
due to which the deceased sustained grievous injuries and
finally succumbed to injuries.
4. Undisputedly, the appellant in MFA
No.715/2021 is the insurer of one of the lorries and the
appellant in MFA No.5780/2021 is insurer of other lorry
which are involved in the accident.
5. The Tribunal through the impugned order held
that the drivers of both the lorries are equally negligent.
The Tribunal gave a finding that both the insurance
companies are at liability to pay 50% of the awarded
amount each. These appeals are filed by the respective
insurance companies disputing their liability.
6. Though Smt.Geetha Raj and Sri.Pradeep.B
argued at length holding that the drivers of the respective
lorries were not negligent, yet the relevant police records
reveals that the accident occurred due to the negligence of
drivers of both the lorries. No contra evidence is produced
by the appellants herein to establish their version that
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
their drivers were not at fault. The Tribunal discussing at
length with regard to each and every aspect of the case
held that both the insurance companies are at liability to
pay 50% of the compensation each. Having considered the
evidence produced, this Court is of the view that there are
no grounds to interfere with in that regard.
7. Coming to the quantum, the submission that is
made by both the learned counsel i.e., Sri.Pradeep.B and
Smt.Geetha Raj is that the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is not according to the norms established by the
Hon'ble Apex Court. It is not in dispute that the deceased
died as bachelor. Therefore, 50% of the earnings of the
deceased are required to be deducted towards the
personal and living expenses which the deceased would
have incurred for himself had he been alive. However, the
Tribunal deducted 1/3rd of the income towards personal
and living expenses which is improper.
8. Coming to the earnings of the deceased by the
date of accident, though it is projected that the deceased
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
was a driver by profession, at least his driving license was
not produced before the Tribunal. Therefore, as rightly
contended by the learned counsels for the appellants, the
notional income should be taken into consideration. For
the relevant period i.e., for the period of 2011, the
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the
notional income as Rs.6,500/- p.m. In the absence of any
proof with regard to the actual occupation and earnings of
the deceased by the date of accident, this Court considers
desirable to take the notional income as Rs.6,500/-. The
deceased was aged about 26 years by the date of
accident. Therefore, 40% of the earnings are required to
be added towards future prospects as per the decision of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance
Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in
(2017) 16 SCC 680. That apart, the appropriate multiplier
to be applied is '17' as per the decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and
Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another
reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104. Therefore, the
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
compensation which the parents of the deceased are
entitled to under the head loss of dependency is as under:
Notional monthly income Rs.6,500/-
Annual income Rs.78,000/-
On adding 40% towards future Rs.1,09,200/-
prospects
On deducting 50% towards Rs.54,600/-
personal and living expenses
Loss of dependency, on applying Rs.9,28,200/-
appropriate multiplier 17
9. Thus the parents of the deceased are entitled to
a sum of Rs.9,28,200/- under the head loss of
dependency. Together with the said amount they are
entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards loss of filial consortium,
Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.15,000/-
towards loss of estate. Thus the total compensation which
the claimants are entitled to is as under:
Sl. Description Amount
No
1 Loss of dependency Rs.9,28,200
2 Loss of filial consortium Rs.40,000
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
3 Funeral expenses Rs.15,000
4 Loss of estate Rs.15,000
Total Rs.9,98,200
10. The Tribunal through the impugned order
awarded a sum of Rs.23,88,800/- as compensation.
However a justifiable sum which the claimants are entitled
to is Rs.9,98,200/-. Apart from the said amount, the
Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.34,000/- towards
transportation, conveyance and vehicle repairs. The said
amount is required to be retained. Thus the total
compensation which the claimants are entitled to is
Rs.10,32,200/- (Rs.9,98,200+Rs.34,000). Thus both the
appeals are disposed of with the following:
ORDER
(i) Both the appeals are allowed in part.
(ii) The compensation that is granted by the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Chintamani through orders in MVC
No.50/2014 dated 17.01.2020 is reduced
from Rs.23,88,800/- to Rs.10,32,200/-.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:44621
(iii) The findings of the Tribunal on all other
aspects holds good.
(iv) The amount, if any, in deposit in both the
appeals be transmitted to the concerned
Tribunal immediately.
(v) The amount, if any, deposited by the
appellants in both the appeals in excess to
the sum that is awarded, be refunded to
the appellants, on due verification.
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
NS
CT:TSM
