Partly allowed

Renavva @ Renuka W/O Ramappa Bhavani, v. Kumuda Venkayya Naik

Karnataka HC26 Feb 2019MFA/100212/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed an appeal against M.A.C.T. award in a motor accident claim, enhancing total compensation from Rs.4,43,000/- to Rs.12,17,400/- by revising income calculation and increasing loss of love and affection damages per SCC rulings.

What did the court decide?

Modified the M.A.C.T. award, increasing total compensation to Rs.12,17,400/- with 6% annual interest payable by the insurer within four weeks.

Renavva @ Renuka W/O Ramappa Bhavani, Vs Kumuda… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶2

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BAJANTHRI

¶5

M.F.A.NO.100212 OF 2016 (MV-D)

¶6

BETWEEN

¶7

RENAVVA @ RENUKA W/O RAMAPPA BHAVANI, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE HOLD WORK, R/O DURGAD ONI, UNKAL HUBBLLI,

¶8

MALLIKARJUN S/O RAMAPPA BHAVANI, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: DURGAD ONI, UNKAL, HUBLI.

¶9

....APPELLANTS

¶10

(BY SRI.B.S.SANGATI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND

¶12

KUMUDA VENKAYYA NAIK, AGE: MAJOR YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF THE CAR, R/O GANUMANI BABURUWADA, ANKOLA (U.K.).

¶13

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE MANAGER, ANKOLA COMPLEX, P.B. ROAD, NEAR DISTRICT COURT, DHARWAD.

¶14

... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M.G.GADGOLI, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 AND R-2)

¶15

¶16

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 AND PRAYED TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.06.2015 PASSED IN M.V.C.NO.317 OF 2013 BY THE COURT OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL M.A.C.T., HUBLI. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶17

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING :

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Instant appeal is by the claimants against the judgment and award dated 27.06.2015 passed in M.V.C.No.317 of 2013 by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and Additional M.A.C.T., Hubli (for short ‘the M.A.C.T’).

¶20

Facts of the case are that, on 23.04.2013 at about

¶21

3.00 p.m. on Hubli-Karwar road, near Devikoppa Forest

¶22

Naka, Kalaghatagi, deceased-Siddu along with pillion rider by name Naveen Basavaraj Teggihalli were traveling on a motorcycle bearing register No.KA-25/EC-5105, at that time, Car bearing No.KA-30/M-5975 approached from the opposite direction in a negligent manner, which hit the motorcycle resulted in death of Siddu rider of the

¶23

¶24

motorcycle, even the pillion rider suffered injuries. Arising out of the accident mother and brother of the deceasedSiddu filed claim petition before the M.A.C.T.

¶25

On 27.06.2015 M.A.C.T. has proceeded to pass an

¶26

award of compensation for a sum of Rs.4,43,000/-, dissatisfied with the same, claimants have filed this appeal.

¶27

Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that M.A.C.T. has committed error in taking the income of Rs.3,000/- per month in the absence of any documentary evidence for taking income of the deceased-

¶28

Siddu. It is further contended that 40% of future prospects has not been extended and so also meager amount of compensation has been awarded under the other heads. Hence, present appeal is filed for enhancement of compensation.

¶29

On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent/Insurance Company defended the order of the

¶30

¶31

M.A.C.T. and also submitted that there is no infirmity in the award. Appellants have not made out a case for enhancement of compensation.

¶32

Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶33

Having regard to the date of accident is on 23.04.2013 and the fact that M.A.C.T. has taken income at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month as deceased income, which is too meager for the reasons that Lok-Adalath guidelines for the year-2013 to the extent that in the absence of income proof, it has identified the income at the rate of Rs.7,000/- per month, whereas in the pleadings and evidence, claimants have stated that income of the deceased was Rs.6,000/- per month. Therefore, income could be restricted to Rs.6,000/- per month.

¶34

In the absence of any proof relating to whether deceased was a salaried person or self employed is entitled for 40% of future prospects in terms of National

¶35

¶36

Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Pranay Sethi and others ,

¶37

reported in 2017 ACJ 2700 . Accordingly, the loss of dependency would be calculated by taking the income of claimant at Rs.6,000/- per month, adopting 40% towards loss of future prospects, deducting 1/3^rd towards the personal expenses and also applying the appropriate multiplier 17. Further, there is no error in awarding funeral expenses. Whereas in respect of compensation awarded under the head of loss of love and affection of petitioner No.1 meager amount of Rs.10,000/- has been awarded, it should be enhanced to another Rs.40,000/- (10,000/- + 40,000/- = 50,000/-) in terms of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance

¶38

Co. Ltd., V. Nanu Ram and others reported in 2018 ACJ 2782 . The compensation of Rs.25,000/- awarded by the M.A.C.T. under the head of conventional compensation including funeral expenditure remain unaltered.

¶39

¶40

Accordingly, award of compensation passed by the M.A.C.T.

¶41

is reassessed as under :

¶42

Loss of dependency : (Rs.6,000/- +40%–1/3^rdX 12 X 17)	Rs.11,42,400/-
Conventional compensation including funeral expenditure	Rs. 25,000/-
Loss of love affection of petitioner No.1.	Rs. 50,000/-
Total	Rs.12,17,400/-

¶43

The appeal filed by the claimants is allowed in part. Accordingly, the judgment and award dated 27.06.2015 passed by the M.A.C.T. in M.V.C.No.317 of 2013 is hereby modified and the appellant/claimants are entitled to the total compensation of Rs.12,17,400/instead of Rs.4,43,000/- awarded by the M.A.C.T along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit of the award amount. The order of apportionment and deposit ordered by the M.A.C.T. shall hold good for the compensation awarded in this appeal.

¶44

¶45

The Insurance Company shall deposit the entire award

¶46

amount with interest within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶47

SD JUDGE

¶48

Ckk

Renavva @ Renuka W/O Ramappa Bhavani, v. Kumuda Venkayya Naik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Renavva @ Renuka W/O Ramappa Bhavani, v. Kumuda Venkayya Naik

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Shashidhar Vs Karnataka Housing Board

Shekanna S/O Harijan Eranna Vs P. Madhusudhan S/O Radhakrishna

Bheemangouda S/O Basappa Vs the Secretary

Smt.Anusuya W/O. Ningappa Olekar Vs Basappa S/O. Peerappa Chawan

Shivakka W/O. Hanumanthappa Gonimath Vs the Divisional Controller

Gadigevva W/O. Channabasappa Gonimath Vs the Divisional Controller Ksrtc