Appeals against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award of compensation and fastening of liability on the insurance company were dismissed.
All appeals dismissed with no order as to costs; amount in deposit directed to be transmitted to the Tribunal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF JULY 2020
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT
AND
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. SRISHANANDA
MFA NO.100975 OF 2016 (MV) C/W
M.F.A. NO. 100976 OF 2016, M.F.A. NO. 100977 OF 2016, M.F.A. NO. 101247 OF 2016, M.F.A. NO. 101249 OF 2016, M.F.A. NO. 101250 OF 2016
IN MFA NO.100975 OF 2016 (MV)
BETWEEN
2
R/O: SINDIGERI VILLAGE, IN BALLARI TALUK AND DISTRICT, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 3RD CROSS, 3RD ROAD, KUVEMPUNAGAR, BALLARI.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. M. AMARE GOUDA, ADVOCATE)
AND
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MANJUNATH G PATIL, ADV., FOR R2; SRI. S. S. JOSHI, ADV., FOR R3; R1- NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 01.01.2016, PASSED IN MVC.NO.983/2013 ON THE FILE OF
3
THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL -XII, BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN M.F.A. NO. 100976 OF 2016
BETWEEN
SMT. SWAPNA W/O DHANU, AGE: 22 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE, R/O: NEAR TARANATH HOSPITAL, ANANTAPUR ROAD, BALLARI.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. M. AMARE GOUDA, ADVOCATE)
AND
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MANJUNATH G PATIL, ADV., FOR R2;
4
SRI. S. S. JOSHI, ADV., FOR R3; R1- NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.01.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.985/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XII, BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN M.F.A.NO.100977 OF 2016
BETWEEN
E. RANGASWAMY @ RANGANATH S/O LATE RANGANNA, AGE: 25 YEARS, R/O: SINDIGERI VILLAGE IN BALLARI TALUK AND DISTRICT, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT 3RD CROSS, 3RD ROAD, KUVEMPUNAGAR, BALLARI.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. M. AMARE GOUDA, ADVOCATE)
AND
5
AGE: 48 YEARS, SREE MAHADEVI TRANSPORT, RAILWAY STATION ROAD, MADAKARI NAGAR, CHELLAKERE IN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MANJUNATH G PATIL, ADV., FOR R2; SRI. S. S. JOSHI, ADV., FOR R3; R1- NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.01.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.986/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XII, BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN M.F.A.NO.101247 OF 2016
BETWEEN
THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, B.M. COMPLEX, LAXMI BAZAAR, CHITRADURGA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ARIHANT PLAZA, 2ND FLOOR, KUSUGAL ROAD, HUBLI.
6
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S. S. JOSHI, ADVOCATE)
AND
7
AND PRESENTLY R/AT: 3RD CROSS, 3RD ROAD, KUVEMPU NAGAR, BALLARI.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MANJUNATH G. PATIL, ADV., FOR R2; SRI. M. AMARE GOUDA, ADV., FOR R3 TO R5; R1 – NOTICE SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 01.01.2016, PASSED IN MVC.NO.983/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL - XII, AT BALLARI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.6,95,200/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 7% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITIONS TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.
IN M.F.A.NO.101249 OF 2016
BETWEEN
THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, B.M. COMPLEX, LAXMI BAZAAR, CHITRADURGA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ARIHANT PLAZA, 2ND FLOOR, KUSUGAL ROAD, HUBLI.
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S. S. JOSHI, ADVOCATE)
AND
8
DRIVER OF BUS BEARING REG.NO.KA.16/A-9078, R/O 3RD CROSS, GANDHI NAGAR, SANGOLLI RAYANNA RASTHE, CHELLAKERE IN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MANJUNATH G. PATIL, ADV., FOR R2; SRI. M. AMARE GOUDA, ADV., FOR R3; R1 – NOTICE SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 01.01.2016, PASSED IN MVC.NO.985/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XII, BALLARI, AWARDING THE COMPENSTION OF RS.1,48,600/WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 7% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS DEPOSIT.
IN M.F.A.NO.101250 OF 2016
BETWEEN
THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
9
B.M. COMPLEX, LAXMI BAZAAR, CHITRADURGA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, ARIHANT PLAZA, 2ND FLOOR, KUSUGAL ROAD, HUBLI. ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. S. S. JOSHI, ADVOCATE) AND
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MANJUNATH G. PATIL, ADV., FOR R2; SRI. M. AMARE GOUDA, ADV., FOR R3 TO R1 – NOTICE SERVED)
10
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 01.01.2016, PASSED IN MVC.NO.986/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL - XII, AT BALLARI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.2,08,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 7% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITIONS TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.
THESE MFAs COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, V. SRISHANANDA, J DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
All these appeals are arising out of the common judgment and award dated 01.01.2016 passed in MVC
No.983/2016 to 986/2016 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal – XII, Ballari (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal” for short).
of these appeals are as under:
The claim petitions were filed by the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act alleging that on 23.05.2013 at about 11.30 p.m. when Smt. Mallamma @ Malleshwari along with others were traveling in an Auto-
11
rickshaw bearing No.KA-34/A-4209 and when they reached near KEB Power Station on Bengaluru road in Ballari, a bus bearing No.KA-16/A-9078 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the autorickshaw resulting in serious injuries to the inmates of the auto-rickshaw. Thereafter, they were shifted to VIMS Hospital, Bellari and then to Community Health Center, Dhone in Karnool District, but Mallamma @ Malleshwari succumbed to the injuries on the way to hospital itself. It is further contended that the other two claimants in MVC No.985/2016 and 986/2016 also sustained grievous injuries and spent huge money towards medical treatment. The claimants in MVC No.983/2016 have sought for compensation for the death of Mallamma and claimants in MVC No.985/2016 and 986/2016 have sought for compensation for the injuries sustained by them in the said accident.
In pursuance of notice issued, respondents 1 to 3 appeared before the Tribunal and filed their separate
12
written statements denying the averments made in all the claim petitions.
In order to prove the claim petition averments, totally six witnesses were examined on behalf of the claimants as P.W.1 to P.W.6 and relied on documentary evidence which were marked vide Exs.P.1 to 20. On behalf of the respondent/insurance company, one T.V.Mahesh the Administrative Officer got examined as R.W.1 and relied on two documents which were marked vide Ex.R.1/copy of insurance policy and Ex.R.2/copy of charge sheet.
The Tribunal after considering the entire material on record and hearing the parties allowed the petitions by awarding compensation on the following heads:
| MVC No.983/2013 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Towards loss of dependency | Rs.6,55,000/- |
| 2. | For the loss of estate | Rs. 10,000/- |
| 3. | For the loss of love and affection | Rs. 10,000/- |
| 4. | Towards funeral expenses | Rs. 20,000/- |
| Total | Rs.6,95,200/- |
13
| MVC No.985/2013 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1. | For the injuries pain and sufferings | Rs. 50,000/- |
| 2. | Towards medical expenses and also attendant charges |
Rs. 40,000/- |
| 3. | For the loss of future earning capacity or for disability |
Rs. 48,600/- |
| 4. | For the loss of future amenities of life |
Rs. 10,000/- |
| Total | Rs.1,48,200/- |
| MVC No.986/2013 | ||
|---|---|---|
| 1. | For the injuries pain and sufferings | Rs. 40,000/- |
| 2. | Towards medical expenses and also attendant charges |
Rs. 50,000/- |
| 3. | For the loss of future earning capacity or for disability |
Rs.1,08,000/- |
| 4. | For the loss of future amenities of life |
Rs. 10,000/- |
| Total | Rs.2,08,000/- |
It is that common judgment, which is under
challenge in these appeals.
14
appellants/claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and sought for enhancement. The learned counsel for claimants contends that the monthly income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.4,500/- is incorrect and also contends that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal on conventional heads is also on the lower side and sought for enhancement. The learned counsel for the claimants also contend that the compensation awarded for injured claimants is on lower side and sought for enhancement.
appearing for the insurance company contends that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal itself is on the higher side and sought for reduction of the same. Further he contended that there was clear breach of permit condition as such the fastening of the liability on the
15
Insurance Company is erroneous and sought for allowing the appeals filed by the Insurance Company.
the points that would arise for our consideration are as under:
point Nos.(ii) & (iii) in the negative for the following:
REASONS
that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in all the claims is too meager. It is contented that on
16
conventional heads also, the Tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation and sought for enhancement.
insurance company contends that having regard to permit conditions as well as other material on record, especially when the driver of offending vehicle has been charge-
sheeted under Section 66(1) and 192(A) of Indian Motor Vehicles Act, fastening liability on the insurance company by the Tribunal is wrong and sought for allowing the appeals preferred by the insurance company.
the deceased was aged 45 years. On record, there was no material to show that the deceased and the claimants in MVC No.985/2013 and 986/2013 were having any definite source of income. In the absence of such material on record, the Tribunal made a guesswork and notionally assessed their income at Rs.4,500/- per month in MVC
17
Nos983/2013 and 985/2013 and Rs.5,000/- in MVC No.986/2013, which we do not incline to interfere with.
18
25% of the assessed income towards future prospects but since we are not inclined to reassess the monthly income of Rs.4,500/- and if reassessed, it would be much more than Rs.4,500/- p.m., hence we do not want to disturb the addition of 30% of the assessed income made by the Tribunal towards future prospects in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. With regard to compensation awarded by the Tribunal on other heads also, we do not find any error and same is maintained.
19
sheeted under Section 66(1) and 192(A) of Indian Motor Vehicles Act and therefore, fastening liability on the insurance company by the Tribunal is incorrect.
20
appreciation of materials placed before it, has negatived the contention of the insurance company that the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation and has fastened the liability on the insurance company to pay the compensation.
material on record and moreover since the insurer has failed to place on record the investigation report, adverse inference will have drawn against the insurer, hence we are unable to accept the contentions urged on behalf of the insurance company that the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. The grounds urged by the insurance company sans merit.
21
ORDER
All appeals sans merit and are hereby dismissed.
No order as to costs.
The amount in deposit, if any, made by
the insurance company is directed to be
transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
yan
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rajesh and others v. Rajbir Singh and othersReferred¶145
Rajesh and others v. Rajbir Singh and others reported in 2013 ACJ 1403
National Insurance Company Ltd vs. Pranay Sethi and othersReferred¶146
National Insurance Company Ltd vs. Pranay Sethi and others, AIR 2017 Supreme Court 5157 · Who else cites this
E. PANDU S/O. LATE RANGANNA
E. RANGASWAMY
KUM. RADHA
SMT. SWAPNA
THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
D. SWALEHA
S.G. PANDIT
V. SRISHANANDA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
