Disposed

Kaveri @ Kaveramma W/O. Shivaraj v. Hanumantha S/O. Manikappa

Karnataka HC24 Jan 2019MFA/201080/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of two miscellaneous first appeals arising from a motor accident case. The court enhanced the compensation awarded to the claimant from Rs. 48,700 to Rs. 75,000. It disposed of the insurance company's appeal by relying on findings in a connected case regarding liability.

What did the court decide?

Enhancement of compensation award to Rs. 75,000 including interest for both appeals; liability appeal disposed of.

Kaveri @ Kaveramma W/O. Shivaraj Vs Hanumantha S/O… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

¶6

MFA NO.201080/2014 (MV) C/w MFA NO.201326/2014 (MV)

¶7

IN MFA NO.201080/2014:

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

Kaveri @ Kaveramma W/o Shivaraj Age: 31 Years, Occ: Coolie R/o Kapgal Village Tq. Manvi, Dist: Raichur-584101

¶10

... Appellant

¶11

(By Sri Babu H. Metagudda, Advocate)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Hanumantha S/o Manikappa Age: 34 Years Occ: Driver of Lorry No.KA-36/5376 R/o Indira Nagar Manvi, Dist. Raichur-584101

¶14

Basavaraj R. S/o Ramachandra Shetty Age: Major, Occ: Business & Owner of Lorry No.KA-36/5376 R/o H.No.7-2-164 Near Bannikatti Pattar Oni

¶15

¶16

Manvi, Dist. Raichur-584101

¶17

The Manager Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. No.302, 3^rd Floor S & S Corner Building Plot No.48, Hospital Road Shivaji Nagar, Bangalore-1

¶18

Basha S/o Rajasab Since Dead by LR Smt. Roshan Bee W/o Late Basha Age: Major Occ: Owner of TATA ACE No.KA-36/A-5320 R/o Kapgal, Tq. Manvi Dist. Raichur-584101

¶19

The Manager Royal Sundaram Db Plaza 3^rd Floor, 47 Whites Road Chennai-532001

¶20

... Respondents

¶21

(Smt Bhadrashetty Sangeeta, Advocate for R3; Sri C.S. Kalburgi, Advocate for R5; Notice to R1 and R2 dispensed with V/O Dated 01.03.2017; Notice to R4 held sufficient)

¶22

This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, praying to allow this appeal and modify the judgment and award dated 22.04.2014 passed in MVC No.538/2013 by the Member, MACT (II-ADJ) at Raichur by enhancing the

¶23

¶24

compensation from Rs.48,700/- with 6% interest to Rs.14,99,000/- with 12% interest.

¶25

IN MFA NO.201326/2014:

¶26

BETWEEN: The Manager Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. No.302, 3^rd Floor S & S Corner Buildings Plot No.48, Hospital Road Shivajinagar, Bangalore-1 Now represented by its Authorized Signatory Corporate Office Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. E-8, EPIP, RIICO Industrial Area Sitapur, Jaipur, Rajasthan-302022

¶27

... Appellant

¶28

(By Smt Bhadrashetty Sangeeta, Advocate)

¶29

AND:

¶30

Kaveri @ Kaveramma W/o Shivaraj Age: 31 Years, Occ: Coolie R/o Kapgal Village Tq. Manvi, Dist: Raichur-584118

¶31

Hanumantha S/o Manikappa Age: 34 Years Occ: Driver of Lorry No.KA-36/5376 R/o Indiranagar Manvi Dist. Raichur-584123

¶32

¶33

Basavaraj R. S/o Ramachandra Shetty Age: Major, Occ: Business & Owner of Lorry No.KA-36/5376 R/o H.No.7-2-164 Near Bannikatti Pattar Oni Manvi, Tq. Manvi Dist. Raichur-584123 4. Basha S/o Rajasab Since Dead by LR Smt. Roshan Bee W/o Late Basha Age: Major Occ: Owner of TATA ACE No.KA-36/A-5320 R/o Kapgal, Tq. Manvi Dist. Raichur-584118 5. The Manager Royal Sundaram Db Plaza 3^rd Floor, 47 Whites Road Chennai-600002 ... Respondents

¶34

(Sri Babu H. Metagudda, Advocate for R1; Sri. C.S. Kalburgi, Advocate for R5; Notice to R2 to R4 served but unrepresented)

¶35

This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, praying to allow this appeal and set aside the impugned common judgment and award passed in MVC No.538/2013 dated 22.04.2014 on the file of the Member, MACT and II Addl. District Judge at Raichur.

¶36

¶37

These appeals are coming on for admission, this day, the court delivered the following:

¶38

COMMON JUDGMENT

¶39

Since both the appeals arising out of the same

¶40

judgment and award, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

¶41

Even though the appeals are listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, they are taken up for final disposal.

¶42

MFA No.201080/2014 is by the appellantclaimant seeking enhancement of compensation granted under the judgment and award in MVC No.538/2013 dated 22.04.2014 passed by the Member, MACT (II-ADJ), Raichur, whereas MFA No.201326/2014 is filed by the insurance company, challenging the liability fastened on it under the aforesaid judgment and award.

¶43

¶44

The appellant-Insurance Company in its

¶45

appeal has challenged its liability on the ground that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the Lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-36/5376 and the accident had taken place solely on the negligent driving of the driver of the TATA ACE bearing Reg.No.KA-36/A-5320. This contention of the appellant-Insurance Company is answered in MFA No.201252/2014 connected with MFA No.201328/2014, decided on 24.01.2019 and the finding recorded therein would hold good in this appeal also in so far as liability of the insurance company is concerned. Accordingly, MFA No.201326/2014 is disposed of.

¶46

The Tribunal has framed issue No.2, as to whether the claimants are entitled for award of compensation? If so from whom?

¶47

The said issue has been answered by the Tribunal relying upon the decisions of the Hon’ble

¶48

¶49

Supreme Court in the case of RAJRANI AND ORS. V. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. & ORS. reported in 2009 ACJ 2003 SC and in the case of PAVAN KUMAR AND ANR. V. HARIKISHAN DAS MOHAN LAL & ORS. reported in 2014 ACJ 704, which deals with composite negligence. The Tribunal has held that the accident has taken place due to composite negligence of both Tata Ace and lorry in question. The claimants have claimed compensation making respondent Nos.1 to 3 as parties. The Tribunal on consideration and relying on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court supra, held that the claimants could enforce award against respondent Nos.1 to 3 at their choice. The finding of the Tribunal on this issue needs no interference.

¶50

7 MFA No.201080/2014 is filed by the appellant-claimant seeking enhancement of

¶51

compensation. The Tribunal has granted Rs.20,000/under pain and suffering head, Rs.5,000/- under the

¶52

¶53

head of loss of amenities in life and Rs.18,000/towards loss of earning during treatment. The Tribunal has rightly not granted compensation for future earning, noting that the claimant has not suffered any functional disability even though the doctor has opined 8% disability to the whole body. The Tribunal has totally granted a sum of Rs.48,700/-. Looking to the injuries suffered by the claimant, I deem it appropriate to and award a total global compensation of Rs.75,000/including Rs.48,700/-, granted by the Tribunal with interest as awarded by the Tribunal.

¶54

Accordingly, MFA No.201080/2014 is disposed of.

¶55

Sd/JUDGE

¶56

Kaveri @ Kaveramma W/O. Shivaraj v. Hanumantha S/O. Manikappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaveri @ Kaveramma W/O. Shivaraj v. Hanumantha S/O. Manikappa

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

Ravindra S/O Iragantappa Nadageri Ors. Vs Digambarappa S/O Ningappa Garasangi Anr.

Sri. Nagesh S/O Ramachandra Babar Vs Smt. Laxmi W/O Nagesh Babar and Anr.

Shankramma Vs Basappa and Ors.

New India Assurance Co.Ltd, Bijapur Vs Sri. Sangappa S/O Krishnapa Hosmani and Anr.

Mahadevi W/O. Veeresh Vs Hanumantha S/O. Manikappa

Parvatamma W/O. Sharanappa Vs Hanumantha S/O. Manikappa