The Branch Manager vs Kalappa And Ors
2024 Latest Caselaw 26676 Kant

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 26676 Kant
Judgement Date : 7 November, 2024

Karnataka High Court

The Branch Manager vs Kalappa And Ors on 7 November, 2024

                                                 -1-
                                                             NC: 2024:KHC-K:8190
                                                         MFA No. 202435 of 2019




                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                        KALABURAGI BENCH

                             DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

                                              BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
                           MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 202435 OF 2019 (MV-D)

                      BETWEEN:

                      1.   THE BRANCH MANAGER
                           IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD
                           MAHAJANI ARCADE, NEAR 1ST MEGHARAJ HOTEL
                           RAILWAY STATION ROD, VIJAYAPUR
                           (THROUGH AUTHORISED SIGNATORY)
                                                                 ...APPELLANT

                      (BY SRI. SUBHASH MALLAPUR, ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                      1.   KALAPPA
                           S/O GUREPPA BADIGER
                           AGE: 52 YEARS
                           OCC: CARPETNERE
Digitally signed by
RENUKA                2.   MEENAKSHI W/O KALAPPA BADIGER
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                   AGE: 47 YEARS
KARNATAKA
                      3.   VEERESH S/O KALAPPA BADIGER
                           AGE: 24 YEARS
                           OCC: CARPETNER

                      4.   P.K.BADIGER @ POORNIMA
                           D/O KALAAPPA BADIGER
                           AGE: 21 YEARS

                           ALL R/O NANDAWADAGI VILLAGE
                           NOW AT SULTANAPUR VILLAGE
                           RAICHUR-584 101.
                              -2-
                                        NC: 2024:KHC-K:8190
                                    MFA No. 202435 of 2019




5.    SIDDAPPA S/O SANGAPPA GONAL
      AGE: 36 YEARS
      OCC: DRIVER -CUM-OWNER OF TUM-TUM
      NO.KA-29/B-2951
      R/O HIRE SANGANAGUTTI VILLAGE
      TQ:HUNGUND, DIST: BAGALKOT-585 371.
                                            ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. NAGARAJ PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2 AND R4;
    SRI. RAVI G. MADABHAVI, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
    R-3 SERVED)

     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY BE PLEASED
TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.10.2019
PASSED BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT
RAICHUR IN MVC NO. 126/2017, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE
AND EQUITY.

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM


                     ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)

The captioned appeal is by the Insurance company

primarily challenging the quantum on the ground that

though it is the case of a death of a bachelor, the Tribunal

instead of deducting 50% has deducted 1/3rd and has

awarded a compensation of Rs.11,52,144/- under the

head 'loss of dependency'.

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8190

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the

appellant/Insurance company, learned counsel appearing

for the claimants and learned counsel appearing for the

owner. Perused the records.

3. On reassessing the evidence, this Court is of

the view that the compensation determined under the

head 'loss of dependency' infact is on the lower side. The

accident is of the year 2016 and therefore, income of the

deceased assessed by the Tribunal notionally at Rs.8,000/-

is on the lower side. If the accident is of the year 2016,

by placing reliance on the chart issued by the Legal

Services Authority, the income is assessed at Rs.8,750/-.

The Tribunal has also not considered future prospects

while determining loss of dependency. There is no cross

appeal by the claimants. Therefore, this Court is also not

inclined to grant any indulgence. There is no scope for

reduction since this Court has noticed that the

compensation determined by the Tribunal is on the lower

side.

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8190

4. At this juncture, learned counsel appearing for

the appellant/Insurance company has brought to the

notice of this Court that though Tribunal held that the

driver of the offending vehicle did not possess effective

driving licence and came to conclusion that the

appellant/Insurance company shall pay the compensation

and recover from the owner, however, in the operative

portion of the award, the said finding is not reflected. The

said finding is noticed at paragraph 13 of the judgment.

To this limited extent, the Insurance company succeeds.

5. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds

to pass the following:

ORDER

(i) The appeal is allowed-in-part;

(ii) The judgment and award of the Tribunal passed in MVC.No.126/2017 is modified insofar as interest awarded by the Tribunal is concerned;

(iii) The appellant/Insurance company is hereby directed to pay the compensation

NC: 2024:KHC-K:8190

determined by the Tribunal with accrued interest at the rate of 6% per annum with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle;