Partly allowed

Smt. Meena v. M/S Cholamandalam

Karnataka HC6 Jul 2021MFA/2457/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the miscellaneous first appeal partly, enhancing compensation in a motor vehicle accident case. It directed a 40% increase for future prospects based on Supreme Court precedents, raising the award to Rs. 16,22,000.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 16,22,000 with interest at 6% per annum; insurance company directed to deposit amount within 90 days.

Smt. Meena Vs M/S Cholamandalam — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 06^TH DAY OF JULY, 2021

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S. INDIRESH

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2457 OF 2017 (MV)

¶8

BETWEEN

¶9

Smt. Meena W/o Mr. K Shivalinge Gowda Aged about 50 years

¶10

Mr. K Shivalinge Gowda S/o Kulle Gowda Aged about 52 years

¶11

Miss Nidhi S D/o Mr. K Shivalinge Gowda Aged about 20 years

¶12

All are R/at No.53, 8^th Cross, 5^th Main R K Layout, Padmanabhanagar Bangalore-560 070.

¶13

...Appellants

¶14

(By Shri Mitty Narasimha Murthy, Advocate)

¶15

AND

¶16

M/s. Cholamandalam Insurance Co. Ltd.

¶17

¶18

3 & 4 Dindigal Highway Road Kalavasal, Madurai Branch Madurai-625 010 Tamilnadu.

¶19

Sri P Ilayaraja S/o Sri Periya Karuppa Thavar, Major 99, Jeyanaichanpatti Nilakottai-624 208 Dindigul Dist Tamilnadu.

¶20

….Respondents

¶21

(By Sri B Pradeep, Advocate for R1; R2 served)

¶22

This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, against the judgment and award dated 07.12.2016 passed in MVC No.4658 of 2014 on the file of the XVI Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru City, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶23

This Miscellaneous First appeal coming on for orders, this day, INDIRESH J., delivered the following:

¶24

J U D G M E N T

¶25

This appeal is filed by the claimants, challenging the judgment and award dated 07^th December, 2016 passed in MVC No.4658 of 2014 on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal’), seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶26

¶27

For the sake of convenience, the parties in this appeal are referred to with their status and rank before the Tribunal.

¶28

The averments made in the claim petition are that, Nikhil-son of claimants 1 and 2, was proceeding on motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-05/HT-7029 from Bangalore to Yercaud and when the motorcycle reached flyover at Dharmapuri, at that time, a 407 Tempo bearing registration No.TN-57/S-4140 dashed to the motorcycle of the deceased from behind and as a result of the said accident, son of the claimant 1 and 2 died. It is the case of the claimants that deceased was aged about 20 years and was pursuing IV Semester Bachelor of Engineering in BMS Engineering College, Bangalore and was earning Rs.10,000/- by giving private tuitions. On account of the death of said Nikhil, claimants have preferred MVC No.4658 of 2014 on the file of the Tribunal seeking compensation.

¶29

On service of notice, respondents served, unrepresented

¶30

and placed ex-parte. Claimant No.2 was examined as PW1 and got produced 33 documents and same were marked as Exhibits

¶31

¶32

P1 to P33. The Tribunal, after considering the material on record, by its judgment and award dated 07^th December, 2016, allowed the claim petition in part and ordered that the claimants are entitled for Rs.12,15,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, claimants have preferred this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶33

We have heard Sri Mitty Narasimhamurthy, learned counsel appearing for the claimants and Sri B. Pradeep, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Insurance Company.

¶34

Learned counsel appearing for the claimants argued that the Tribunal has failed to add future prospects while computing the loss of dependency and therefore, sought for enhancement of compensation.

¶35

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company sought to justify the impugned judgment and award.

¶36

¶37

We have carefully examined the finding recorded by the Tribunal. It is not in dispute that the son of the claimants 1 and 2 died in the road traffic accident on 23^rd June, 2014 and as per the findings, the deceased was aged about 20 years and was pursuing IV Semester Bachelor of Engineering in BMS Engineering College, Bangalore. The Tribunal had taken the income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- per month. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the claimants, future prospects was not taken into consideration. In terms of the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS reported in 2017 ACJ 2700, 40% is to be added toward future prospects. In view of the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SARLA VERMA AND OTHERS v. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER reported in 2009 ACJ 1298, the appropriate multiplier would be 18 and since the deceased was bachelor at the time of the accident, 50% is to be deducted from out of the income towards the personal expenses of the deceased. Hence, loss of dependency would be Rs.15,12,000/- (Rs.10,000/- x 40% x 12 x

¶38

¶39

18 x ½). Claimants are also entitled for Rs.80,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 2) towards loss of consortium; and Rs.15,000/- each towards loss of estate and towards funeral expenses. Hence, the claimants are entitled for Rs.16,22,000/as against Rs.12,15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, we pass the following:

¶40

ORDER

¶41

i) Appeal is allowed in part;

¶42

ii) The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified and enhanced to Rs.16,22,000/- (Rupees Sixteen lakh twenty two thousand only) as against Rs.12,15,000/with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition till its realization without disturbing the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal on Rs.12,15,000/-;

¶43

iii) The portion of the order of the Tribunal inasmuch as liability, apportionment and disbursement remains intact;

¶44

¶45

iv) The insurance company shall deposit the amount determined as aforesaid before the Tribunal within 90 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment and order;

¶46

v) The modified compensation amount shall be apportioned and disbursed in terms of the order of the Tribunal; vi) Draw modified award accordingly; vii) All pending I.As. stand disposed of accordingly.

¶47

Sd/JUDGE

¶48

Sd/JUDGE

¶49

lnn

Smt. Meena v. M/S Cholamandalam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Meena v. M/S Cholamandalam

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

The Manager Vs Smt Kalavathi

Sri. K C Preetham Vs Sri. P Nageshwara Rao

Smt. Shylaja Vs the Managing Director

The Claim Manager Vs Kishan Rao

Sri R Bhojaraj Shetty Vs Halappa M G

Smt. Gangulamma Vs the Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd.