Karnataka High Court
The Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd vs Shekamma on 15 November, 2024
Author: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
MFA No. 200913 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200775 of 2020
MFA No. 200776 of 2020
AND 1 OTHER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
M.F.A NO. 200913 OF 2021 (MV-D)
C/W
M.F.A NO. 200775 OF 2020
M.F.A NO. 200776 OF 2020
M.F.A NO. 200914 OF 2021
IN M.F.A. NO.200913 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. RENUKA
W/O LATE SHIVANAND
AGE:26 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEWIFE
2. PARASAPPA
Digitally signed
by SHAKAMBARI S/O LATE SHIVANAND
Location: HIGH AGE:08 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
3. SHARAT
S/O LATE SHIVANAND
AGE:06 YEARS, OCC:NIL (MINOR)
4. KANTA
D/O LATE SHIVANANDA
AGE:03 YEARS, NIL (MINOR)
(APPELLANT NO.2 TO 4 ARE
MINOR U/G OF THEIR
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
MFA No. 200913 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200775 of 2020
MFA No. 200776 of 2020
AND 1 OTHER
NATURAL MOTHER I.E.
APPELLANT NO.1)
5. REVANSIDDAPPA
S/O SHARANAPPA
AGE:57 YEARS, OCC:NIL
6. BHAGAMMA
D/O MURGEPPA BELAVADAGI
AGE:21 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD
ALL ARE R/O NELOGI VILLAGE
TQ.JEWARGI
DIST.KALABURAGI
NOW R/O CIB COLONY
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. SRIDEVI J. TUPPAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NINGAPPA
S/O CHANDRASHA
AGE:45 YEARS
OCC:OWNER OF VEHICLE
R/O KAWALAGA
TQ. AND DIST-KALABURAGI-585 103
2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER
1ST FLOOR, NG COMPLEX
OPP.MINI SOUDHA, MAIN ROAD
KALABURAGI-585 103
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 07.09.2021 NOTICE TO R1
DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 25.02.2020 ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION
RS.14,28,000/- AS PRAYED BY THE APPELLANTS HEREIN MVC
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
MFA No. 200913 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200775 of 2020
MFA No. 200776 of 2020
AND 1 OTHER
NO.431/2019 BY THE HONORABLE IN THE COURT OF THE II
ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT AT KALABURAGI. BY
ALLOWING THE APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY AND ETC.
IN M.F.A. NO. 200775 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE ORIENTAL INS. CO. LTD.,
THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER
1ST FLOOR, N.G.COMPLEX
OPP.MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA, MAIN ROAD
KALABURAGI
(NOW REPRESENTED BY REGIONAL MANAGER
R.O, HUBLI)
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. RENUKA
W/O LATE SHIVANAND
AGE:25 YEARS, OCCP:HOUSEHOLD
2. PARASAPPA
S/O LATE SHIVANAND
AGE:07 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT
3. SHARAT
S/O LATE SHIVANAND
AGE:05 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT
4. KANTA
D/O LATE SHIVANANDA
AGE:02 YEARS, OCC:NIL (MINOR)
(RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 4 HEREIN
MINOR U/G OF THEIR RESPONDENT NO.1)
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
MFA No. 200913 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200775 of 2020
MFA No. 200776 of 2020
AND 1 OTHER
5. REVANASIDDAPPA
S/O SHARANAPPA
AGE:56 YEARS, OCC:NIL
6. BHAGAMMA
D/O REVANASIDDAPPA
AGE:20 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD
ALL ARE R/O NELOGI VILLAGE
TQ.JEWARGI, DIST.KALABURAGI
NOW R/O CIB COLONY
KALABURAGI-585 101
7. NINGAPPA
S/O CHANDRASHA
AGE:46 YEARS
OCCP:OWNER OF VEHICLE
R/O KAWALAGA
TQ. AND DIST-KALABURAGI-585 101
...RESPONDENTS
(NOTICE TO R1, R5, R6 & R7 ARE SERVED;
R2 TO R4 MINORS U/G OF R1)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL BY
SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED COMMON JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 25.02.2020 IN MVC NO.431/2014 PASSED BY
THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND M.A.C.T,
KALABURAGI, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN M.F.A No.200776 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE ORIENTAL INS. CO. LTD.,
THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER
1ST FLOOR, N.G. COMPLEX
OPP. MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA
MAIN ROAD, KALABURAGI
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
MFA No. 200913 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200775 of 2020
MFA No. 200776 of 2020
AND 1 OTHER
(NOW REPRESENTED BY
REGIONAL MANAGER, R.O, HUBLI)
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHEKAMMA
W/O LATE NANDU KAMBAR
AGE:22 YEARS
OCC:HOUSE WIFE
2. AMULYA
D/O LATE NANDU KAMBAR
AGE: 05 YEARS
OCC: STUDENT
3. MANJUNATH
D/O LATE NANDU KAMBAR
AGE: 01 YEAR 6 MTS, MINOR
(RESP.NO. 2 AND 3 HEREIN
MINOR U/G OF THEIR NATURAL
MOTHER RESP.NO. 1 HEREIN)
4. SHIVALINGAPPA
S/O HANAMANT KAMABAR
AGE: 63 YEARS OCC: NIL
5. SARASWATI
W/O SHIVALINGAPPA KAMBAR
AGE: 59 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD
ALL ARE R/O NELOGI VILLAGE
TQ:JEWARGI, DIST: KALABURAGI
NOW R/O CIB COLONY
KALABURAGI-585 101
6. NINGAPPA
S/O CHANDRASHA
AGE: 46 YEARS
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
MFA No. 200913 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200775 of 2020
MFA No. 200776 of 2020
AND 1 OTHER
OCC: OWNER OF VEHICLE
R/O:KAWALAGA
TQ & DIST: KALABURGI-585 101
...RESPONDENTS
(R1 , R4 TO R6 ARE SERVED;
R2 & R3 ARE MINORS REPTD BY R1)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO
CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL BY
SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED COMMON JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 25.02.2020 IN MVC NO.494/2019 PASSED BY
THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND M.A.C.T, KALABURAGI
IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN M.F.A No.200914 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
1. SHEKAMMA
W/O LATE NANDU KAMBAR
AGE:21 YEARS
OCC:HOUSE WIFE
2. AMULYA
D/O LATE NANDU KAMBAR
AGE: 04 YEARS
OCC: STUDENT
3. MANJUNATH
S/O LATE NANDU KAMBAR
AGE: 06 MONTHS, OCC:NIL (MINOR)
(APPELLANTS NO. 2 AND 3 BOTH
ARE MINOR U/G OF THEIR NATURAL
MOTHER I.E APPELLANT NO.1)
4. SHIVALINGAPPA
S/O HANAMANT KAMABAR
AGE: 62 YEARS OCC: NIL
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
MFA No. 200913 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200775 of 2020
MFA No. 200776 of 2020
AND 1 OTHER
5. SARASWATI
W/O SHIVALINGAPPA KAMBAR
AGE: 58 YEARS
OCC: HOUSEHOLD
ALL ARE R/O NELOGI VILLAGE
TQ:JEWARGI, DIST: KALABURAGI
NOW R/O CIB COLONY
KALABURAGI-585 101
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. SRIDEVI J. TUPPAD, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NINGAPPA
S/O CHANDRASHA
AGE: 45 YEARS
OCC: OWNER OF VEHICLE
R/O:KAWALAGA
TQ & DIST: KALABURGI-585 103
2. THE ORIENTAL INS. CO. LTD.,
THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER
1ST FLOOR, N.G. COMPLEX
OPP. MINI SOUDHA, MAIN ROAD
KALABURAGI-585 103
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 21.09.21 NOTICE TO R1 IS
DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO
CALL FOR RECORDS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 25.02.2020 ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION OF
RS.15,00,000/- AS PRAYED BY THE APPELLANT HEREIN MVC
NO.494/2019 BY THE HONOURABLE IN THE COURT OF THE II
ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT AT KALABURAGI BY
ALLOWING THE APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
-8-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
MFA No. 200913 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200775 of 2020
MFA No. 200776 of 2020
AND 1 OTHER
THESE MFAs HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT
COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF THIS DAY,
RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR J., DELIVERED/PRONOUNCED
THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR
CAV JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR)
These four appeals arise out of a common judgment
and award dated 25th February 2020 passed in MVC
No.431/2019 and 494/19 by the II Addl.Senior Civil Judge
and MACT, Kalaburagi.
2. Appellants in MFA Nos.200775/2020 and MFA
No.200776/2020 are the respective Insurance Companies
who were respondents before the Tribunal questioning the
quantum as well as liability, whereas, MFA
Nos.200913/2021 and MFA No.200914/2021 are filed by
the respective claimants questioning the inadequacy of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
3. Parties to these appeals are referred to as per
their rank before the Tribunal with regard to their
respective claim petitions.
4. As common arguments is heard in all these
appeals and documents and evidence are also common,
common judgment is passed in all these appeals.
5. Brief and relevant facts as set out by the
claimants in their respective petitions are as under:
It is the case of the claimants in both the claim
petitions that, at about 11.00 p.m. on 06.08.2018 on
Jeeratagi-Ranjangi Road near the land of one Dattappa
Poojari Tq.Jewaragi, the deceased Shivananda and Nandu
were travelling in tractor-trolley bearing Regn.No.KA-
32/TA-7766-67 for the purpose of loading and unloading
of sand as per the directions of respondent no.1- the
owner of the tractor-trolley. At that time, the said tractor-
trolley came in a in a high speed and negligent manner,
due to which, it turtled down. Because of this impact,
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
both sustained grievous injuries on their person and died
on the spot. To that effect, a crime in Crime No.181/2018
Nelogi P.S. was registered.
6. It is the case of the claimants that both
deceased were coolies and were earning Rs.500/- each per
day. Because of untimely death of deceased persons, the
claimants in the both these petitions who were depending
upon the deceased are deprived of their livelihood.
Therefore, the claimants in MVC no.431/2019 i.e.
dependents of deceased Shivanand claimed compensation
of Rs.33,00,000/- and claimant No.494/2019 i.e.
dependents of deceased Nandu Kambar claimed
compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- and stated that both the
respondents are liable to pay the compensation. However,
respondent no.2 Insurance Company was directed to
deposit the same.
7. Despite service of notice on respondent no.1,
remained absent and therefore, he was placed ex-parte.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
Respondent no.2 the Insurance Company appeared
through its Standing Counsel and resisted the petition by
filing the detailed objection statement. Respondent No.2
denied the assertions with regard to the income of the
deceased persons, their profession and also liability. It is
contended that, though policy is admitted, but, there is
violation of policy conditions by respondent no.1 therefore,
it is prayed that Insurance Company be exonerated from
paying the compensation.
8. Based upon the rival pleadings of both the
parties, learned Tribunal framed relevant issues in both
the claim petitions.
9. To substantiate and prove the case of the
claimants, the claimant no.1 in both the petitions entered
the witness as PWs. 1 and 2 and got marked Ex.P1 to P8
and closed claimants' evidence. An official of respondent
no.2 was examined as RW.1 and on behalf of respondent
no.2, Ex.R1 to R3 were marked.
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
10. The learned Tribunal on hearing the arguments,
on assessment of the evidence held that the said accident
has taken place because of the rash and negligent driving
of the tractor-trolley by its driver owned by respondent
no.1 and held that both the deceased were labourers and
were earning substantial money towards their livelihood
and assessed the monthly income of both the deceased at
Rs.9,000/- each and ultimately under all the conventional
heads awarded the compensation in both the cases as
under fastening liability on both the respondents but,
however, directed respondent no.2-Insurance company to
indemnify the compensation amount by depositing the
same:
In MVC No.431/2019.
Sl No. Heads Amount in Rs.
1. Love and affection 1,25,000.00
2. Loss of Consortium 40,000.00
3. Loss of dependency 13,77,000.00
4. Funeral expenses and 15,000.00
Transportation Charges
5. Loss of Estate 15,000.00
Total compensation 15,72,000.00
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
In MVC No.494/2019.
Sl No. Heads Amount in Rs.
1. Love and affection 1,00,000.00
2. Loss of Consortium 40,000.00
3. Loss of dependency 13,77,000.00
4. Funeral expenses and 15,000.00
Transportation Charges
5. Loss of Estate 15,000.00
Total compensation 15,47,000.00
11. Being aggrieved by the quantum and liability,
the Insurance Company has preferred the appeal whereas,
challenging the inadequacy of the compensation, the
respective claimants are before this Court seeking
enhancement.
12. The learned counsel for appellant-Insurance
Company with all vehemence submits that, as deceased
were the labourers travelling in the tractor-trolley, the
Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation
and even the compensation awarded is also exorbitant.
Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Co.
Smt.Preethi Patil Melkundi submits that, the Tribunal has
not taken into consideration the terms and conditions of
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
the policy and simply fastened liability on the Insurance
Company. In support of her submission, she relies upon
the evidence of RW.1 and Ex.R1 to 3 and also relied upon
the following decisions and Rules and prays to allow the
appeals of the Insurance Company and exonerate the
Insurance Company from depositing the compensation
amount. She relied upon following judgments.
1. United India Insurance Co. Ltd V. Serjarao
and others, 2008(1) TAC 6 (SC).
2. Indira Bai V. Nisarahmed and others, MFA
No.31546/2013.
3. Rules of Road Regulation,1989.
13. Refuting this submission, the learned counsel
for the claimants in both these appeals submits that the
deceased persons were coolies by profession and at the
direction of owner of tractor - trolley, they were travelling
for loading and unloading the sand to the landed property
to do the agricultural operations. He submits that,
deceased in MFA No.200913/2021 was aged 28 years at
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
the time of accident and deceased in MFA No.200914/2021
was aged 26 years at the time of accident. The learned
Tribunal has not assessed the monthly income of the
deceased in proper manner. Though the accident has
taken place on 6.8.2018, the Tribunal has assessed the
income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- which according to
him is on lower side. He submits that under the other
relevant heads also the compensation has to be enhanced
like that of loss of consortium, loss of estate, funeral
expenses, transportation charges etc., Thus, it is prayed
by the counsel for the claimants to enhance the
compensation.
14. In view of the rival submissions of both sides,
the points that would arise for our consideration are:
(i) Whether the claimants prove that the
compensation so awarded is inadequate?
(ii) Whether the Tribunal is justified in
awarding the compensation fastening the
liability on the Insurance Company?
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
Our answers to point nos. 1 and 2 are in favour
of the claimants for the following reasons:
15. So far as accident is concerned, it is not in
dispute that deceased Shivananda and Nandu were
travelling in the said tractor-trolley bearing
Regn.KA32/P7766-67 on 6.8.2018 at 11.00 p.m as per the
directions of respondent no.1 for the purpose of loading
and unloading of sand to the agricultural land. It is the
specific allegation of the claimants that when the said
tractor-trolley was moving on Jeerathagi-Ranjanagi Road,
near Dattappa Pujari land, the driver of the said tractor-
trolley by driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent
manner and thereby, the said vehicle turtled down and
because of that, both the deceased sustained grievous
injuries on their respective persons and died on the spot.
In support of their submission, the claimants relied upon
Ex.P1 to P8, the crime record such as FIR, complaint,
charge sheet, crime details form, IMV report, inquest
mahazar, PM reports of both the deceased. PWs.1 and 2
- 17 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
have reiterated the petition averments in their evidence on
oath. The only defence of the Insurance Company is denial
of its liability. No effective cross-examination is directed
to PWs 1 and 2, so also the contents of Ex.P1 to P8 are not
denied by the Insurance Company. As rightly observed by
the learned Tribunal, the said accident has taken place
because of rash and negligent driving of tractor-trolley
owned by respondent no.1. Thus, it is proved by the
claimants that because of rash and negligent driving of
tractor-trolley by its driver, the said offending vehicle with
trolley turtled down and because of that, both the
deceased succumbed to the injuries.
16. In MVC No.431/2019 in MVC 490/2019, claimant
no.1 are the respective wives of deceased Shivananda and
Nandu Kambar who died in accident and other claimants are
their parents and children. The status of these claimants in
both the petitions is not in dispute.
- 18 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
17. While answering issue no.2, to award the
compensation, the learned Tribunal has assessed the
compensation towards love and affection, loss of
consortium, funeral expenses, transportation charges and
loss of estate so also loss of dependency. The Tribunal has
considered monthly income of the deceased Shivananda and
Nandu Kambar at Rs.9,000/- per month who alleged to
have been working as Labourer and earning Rs.500/- per
day. The Tribunal has taken into consideration the judgment
in Sarla Verma v. DTC, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121
and awarded the compensation as stated above. So also
relied upon the judgment in National Insurance Co. Ltd.
v. Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and
awarded the compensation in both the claim petitions.
Assessment of compensation by this Court
18. So far as claimants in both the claim
petitioners are concerned, deceased Shivananda and
Nandu were Coolie by profession and were earning
Rs.500/- each per day as per pleadings and evidence of
- 19 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
PWs.1 and 2 being the respective wives of deceased. To
show that he was earning Rs.500/- per day, except the
self-serving pleadings and interested evidence of PWs.1
and 2, there is no concrete evidence to show that
deceased persons used to earn Rs.500/- per day. In the
absence of the same, we have to rely upon the guidelines
issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority
and notional income has to be considered. As the
accident has taken place during 2018, as per the said
guidelines (KSLSA), Rs.12,500/- each is to be taken as
notional income of both the deceased. To calculate the
loss of dependency, as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the Pranay Sethi supra there shall be award of
compensation in the terms and guidelines in the said
judgment.
19. In so far as deceased - Shivananda is
concerned, he was aged 28 years and was doing private
employment therefore, 40% of his income is to be added
as future prospects i.e. Rs.12,500/- + 5000. Thus, the
- 20 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
monthly income of the deceased persons is calculated at
Rs.17500/-. Both the deceased were married and having
dependents i.e. Shivananda had 6 dependents and
deceased Nandu had 5 dependents as stated in their
respective claim petitions. Therefore, 1/4th of total
income is to be deducted towards personal expenses of
deceased persons. Thus, Rs.17,500/- - Rs.4,375/- =
Rs.13,125/-. This would be the monthly income of the
deceased calculated based upon the notional income
stated above.
20. Deceased Shivananda was aged 28 years.
Therefore, as per the judgment in Sarla Verma supra,
the proper multiplier applicable is `17'. Therefore, the
loss of dependency would be Rs.13,125 x 12 x 17 =
Rs.26,77,500/-.Thus, claimants in both the petitions are
held entitled for compensation of Rs.26,77,500/- under
the head of `loss of dependency'. Since deceased Nandu
Kambar was aged 26 years at the time of death, as
similar income is taken and therefore, the multiplier that
- 21 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
is applicable is `17' and hence, the claimants in MVC
No.494/2019 are also held entitled for compensation
under the head of `loss of dependency' to the extent of
Rs.26,77,500/-.
21. So far as claimant nos.1 in both the petitions
are the wife of deceased Shivananda and Nandu. At their
young age, they have lost their respective husbands.
Therefore, towards loss of consortium as per Pranay
Sethi supra, both the claimant no.1 in both the cases are
held entitled for compensation towards `loss of
consortium' at Rs.40,000/- with hike at the rate of 20%
i.e. Rs.48,000/-.
22. So far as claimant nos. 2 to 4 and 5 in MVC
No.431/2019 are concerned, these young claimant nos. 2
to 4 have lost their father at their young age and
claimant no.5 has lost his son so also claimant no.6 being
the sister has lost her earning brother. They are deprived
of love and affection of the deceased. To some extent
- 22 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
towards loss of love and affection, some compensation is
to be awarded to all these claimant nos. 2 to 6.
23. In view of facts and circumstances, if
Rs.20,000/- each is awarded to claimant nos. 2 to 6 is
awarded, it would meet the ends of justice. Under the
conventional heads, `loss of estate' and `transportation
of dead body and funeral expenses', Rs.15,000/- each is
awarded.
24. So far as claimants in MVC No.494/2019 is
concerned, claimant nos. 2 and 3 are the young children
and have lost their father at their young age so also,
claimant nos 4 and 5 are the parents of deceased have
lost their earning member in the family and also have
lost his love and affection. Therefore, these claimant nos.
2 to 5 are held entitled for `loss of love and affection' to
the extent of Rs.20,000/- each.
- 23 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
25. The learned Tribunal has not taken into
consideration with regard to the award of compensation
towards loss of future prospects and other relevant
conventional heads in proper perspective as per the
judgment in Pranay Sethi supra. Therefore, now the
claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation.
26. Thus, the claimants in both these petitions are
held entitled for enhanced compensation as against the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal as per the
tabulation below:
Sl No. Different Heads Amount in Rs.
1. Loss of Dependency 26,77,500.00
2. Loss of Consortium 48,000.00
3. Loss of Love and affection 1,00,000.00
4. Loss of Estate 15,000.00
5. Loss of funeral and 15,000.00
transportation charges
Total 28,55,500.00
- 24 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
Sl No. Different Heads Amount in Rs.
1. Loss of Dependency 26,77,500.00
2. Loss of Consortium 48,000.00
3. Loss of Love and 80,000.00
affection
4. Loss of Estate 15,000.00
5. Loss of funeral and 15,000.00
transportation charges
Total 28,35,500.00
27. So far as liability is concerned, though the
learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the two
judgments stated above, but, the facts of this case are
quite different than the facts of the case. It is admitted
by RW.1 the Official of the Insurance Company that, in
respect of the offending vehicle the insurance company
has issued comprehensive policy. It is settled principle of
law that, the tractor-trolley intended to be used for
agriculture purpose is covered by insurance and coolies
were transported in the tractor to work in the field of the
- 25 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
owner of the vehicle, it cannot be treated as carrying the
passengers for hire or reward and, therefore, there is no
violation of the terms and conditions of the policy as held
by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Divisional Manager, New
India Assurance Company Ltd., Ongole v. Tumu
Gurava Reddy, reported in 1999 SCC OnLine AP 368.
The specific case of the claimants is that, the first
respondent engaged both the deceased persons to load
and unload the sand in his fields. The PW.1 and 2
specifically deposed in their evidence that it was first
respondent engaged both the deceased persons for the
purpose of loading and unloading the sand. No effective
cross-examination is directed to disbelieve such
evidence. The learned Tribunal has rightly observed so. It
is seen that, no suggestion was directed to PWs.1 and 2
that the deceased persons were being carried for hire or
reward. It was a comprehensive policy so produced by
the Insurance Company as admitted by RW.1. The policy
covers use of the vehicle other than the clauses stated.
- 26 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
Admittedly, the tractor and trailor was used for loading
and unloading sand and to carry coolies i.e. deceased
persons.
28. In view of the aforesaid factual aspects and
the legal position, as issuance of comprehensive policy is
admitted by RW.1, as argued by the counsel for the
Insurance Company, the said Insurance Company cannot
be exonerated to deposit the compensation amount. As
rightly held by the Tribunal, the liability of both the
respondents is joint and several and the primary liability
is on the driver of the said offending vehicle. For the
tortious act of the servant, master is liable. Therefore,
respondent no.1 being the owner of the vehicle is
primarily liable to pay the compensation and under law of
indemnity it is respondent no.2 to indemnify the
compensation amount by depositing the same. So far as
interest is concerned, the Tribunal has rightly awarded
6% interest on the compensation so awarded and with
regard to awarding of interest, no interference is
- 27 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
required. However, with regard to the future prospects
claimants are held not entitled for any interest. The
Tribunal while calculating the interest has to exclude the
future prospects and then calculate the interest.
29. Resultantly, We pass the following:
ORDER
(i) Appeals filed by the claimants in MFA
No.200913/2021 and MFA
No.200914/2021 are allowed in-part.
(ii) The appeals filed by the Insurance
Company in MFA No.200775/2020 and
MFA No.200776/2020 are dismissed.
(iii) Claimant in MFA No.200913/2021 held
entitled for a total compensation of
amount of Rs.28,55,500/- as against
Rs.15,72,000/- awarded by the Tribunal
together with interest @ 6% p.a. from the
date of petition till its realization, thereby
the enhanced compensation would be
Rs.12,83,500/-.
- 28 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8507-DB
AND 1 OTHER
(iv) Claimant in MFA No.200914/2021 held
entitled for a total compensation of
amount of Rs.28,35,500/- as against
Rs.15,47,000/- awarded by the Tribunal
together with interest @ 6% p.a. from the
date of petition till its realization. MVC
No.431/2019 and 494/19 by the II
Addl.Senior Civil Judge and MACT,
Kalaburagi. Thereby the enhanced
compensation would be Rs.12,88,500/-.
Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/-
(S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR)
JUDGE
Sk/-
