Partly allowed

M/S. Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Smt. Jyothi N

Karnataka HC4 Aug 2021MFA/3112/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court modified the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's judgment in a motor vehicle accident case, reducing the awarded compensation from Rs.25,27,500 to Rs.21,17,800 along with adjusting the interest rate from 9% to 6% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Compensation revised to Rs.21,17,800 with interest at 6% per annum; Tribunal judgment modified accordingly.

M/S. Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶8

M.F.A. NO.3112 OF 2016 (MV-D)

¶9

C/W

¶10

M.F.A.NO.5755 OF 2016 (MV-D)

¶11

IN M.F.A.NO.3112/2016:

¶12

BETWEEN:

¶13

M/S. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.69, 1ST FLOOR, SVR COMPLEX, HOSUR MAIN ROAD, MADIWALA, BANGALORE, NOW REP. BY IT LEGAL MANAGER, M/S. ICICI LOMBARD GIC LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, THE ESTATE, 9TH FLOOR, DICKENSON ROAD, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-42. ... APPELLANT

¶14

(BY SRI B.C.SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

SMT. JYOTHI N W/O. LATE NARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,

¶17

HANUMANTHAPPA

¶18

S/O. LAKSHMANA,

¶19

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,

¶20

¶21

SMT. HANUMANTHAMMA W/O. HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

¶22

SMT. LAKSHMI D/O. HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,

¶23

ALL ARE RESIDENT OF NO.339, ABBIGERE, BENGALURU NORTH TALUK, BENGALURU-560 090.

¶24

RAJAN BABU B S/O. BALARAMAN K, R/AT NO.2, 9TH MAIN, 13RD B CROSS, VYALIKAVAL, BENGALURU-560 003. ... RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI SHANTARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4)

¶26

¶27

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.12.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.659/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE 13TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.25,27,500/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION.

¶28

IN M.F.A.NO.5755/2016:

¶29

BETWEEN:

¶30

JYOTHI N

¶31

W/O LATE NARASAPPA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS.

¶32

HANUMANTHAPPA S/O LAKSHMANA

¶33

AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS.

¶34

¶35

HANUMANTHAMMA W/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.

¶36

LAKSHMI D/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

¶37

ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.339 ABBIGER, BANGALORE NORTH, BENGALORE-560 090. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI K SHANTARAJ, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶38

THE MANAGER ICICI LOMBORD GEN. INS. CO. LTD. NO.69, 1ST FLOOR, SVR COMPLEX HOSUR MAIN ROAD MADIVALA, BANGALORE-560 068.

¶39

RAJAN BABU B S/O BALARMAN K NO.2, 9TH MAIN 13TH B CROSS VYALIKAVAL BANGALORE-560 003 (EX-PARTE). ...RESPONDENTS

¶40

(BY SRI B.C.SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1, V/O/D 17.04.2018 NOTICE TO R2 D/W)

¶41

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.12.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.659/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE 13TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶42

¶43

THESE M.F.A.s COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶44

JUDGMENT

¶45

These appeals under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) against the judgment dated 18.12.2015 in MVC No.659/2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes at Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short).

¶46

MFA No.3112/2016 is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the quantum of compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal as well as the liability to pay the compensation.

¶47

MFA No.5755/2016 is filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal.

¶48

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeals briefly stated are that on 03.10.2014, when Narasappa was riding his motorcycle towards Abbigere Forest Road,

¶49

¶50

at that time, a car came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle. As a result of the same, the said Narasappa sustained grievous injuries and was shifted to Aveksha Hospital and M S Ramaiah Hospital wherein he succumbed to injuries during the treatment.

¶51

The claimants thereupon filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act claiming compensation on the ground that the deceased was aged about 29 years at the time of accident and was working as plumber and was earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. It was further pleaded that the accident took place solely on account of rash and negligent driving of the car by its driver. The claimants claimed compensation to the tune of Rs.30,00,000/- along with interest.

¶52

After service of notice, the 2nd respondent

¶53

remained absent and he was placed exparte. The 1st respondent appeared through its counsel and filed its

¶54

¶55

objection statement. The 1st respondent - Insurance company filed objection statement, in which the mode and manner of the accident was denied. However, it admitted the policy and its force as on the date of accident. It was also pleaded that the driver of the lorry did not hold a valid and effective driving license at the time of accident and that the liability of the Insurance Company, if any, would be subject to the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. It was also contended that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by the deceased. The age, avocation and income of the deceased was also denied and it was pleaded that the claim of the claimants is exorbitant and excessive.

¶56

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,

¶57

the Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimant No.1 examined herself as PW1 and exhibited documents namely Exs.P1 to 11. The

¶58

¶59

driver of the car was examined as RW1 and Ex.R1 was marked on behalf of the 1st respondent.

¶60

The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the car by its driver. It was further held that as a result of the aforesaid accident, the deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to the same. The Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.25,27,500/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed seeking enhancement of the amount of compensation.

¶61

Learned counsel for the appellant - Insurance

¶62

Company in MFA No.3112/2016 submitted that the compensation amount including interest awarded in favour of claimants is on the higher side and same requires to be reduced.

¶63

¶64

Learned counsel for the claimants submitted

¶65

that the Tribunal has grossly erred in assessing the income of the deceased as Rs.9,000/- per month as he was the sole earner of the family consisting of 5 members. He further submitted that the compensation awarded under the conventional heads is on the lower side and the same requires to be enhanced.

¶66

We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

¶67

The only question which arise for our consideration in these appeals are with regard to the quantum of compensation.

¶68

Admittedly, The claimants have not produced

¶69

any proof to substantiate their claim that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. It is also not in dispute that the deceased at the time of accident

¶70

¶71

was aged about 29 years and was a plumber by avocation. The Tribunal considering the oral evidence of the claimants and also the inquest mahazar at Ex.P5 has held that the deceased was plumber by avocation and a skilled labourer and accordingly assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- p.m. which cannot be said to be on the higher side.

¶72

In view of the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in ‘ NATIONAL

¶73

INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS’ AIR 2017 SC 5157, 40% of the amount

¶74

has to be added on account of future prospects. Thus, the monthly income comes to Rs.12,600/-. The number of dependents are 4, therefore, 1/4 of the amount has to be deducted towards personal expenses and therefore, the monthly dependency comes to Rs.9,450/Taking into account the age of the deceased which was 29 years at the time of accident, the multiplier of ‘17’ has to be adopted. Therefore, the claimants are held

¶75

¶76

entitled to (9450 x 12 x17.) i.e., Rs.19,27,800 /- on account of loss of dependency.

¶77

In view of law laid down by the Supreme Court in ‘MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. NANU RAM & ORS.’ (2018) 18 SCC 130, which has been subsequently clarified by the Supreme Court in ‘UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. SATINDER KAUR AND ORS.’ IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.2705/2020 DECIDED ON 30.06.2020 each of the claimant’s are entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- on account of loss of consortium and loss of love and affection. Thus, the claimants are held entitled to Rs.1,60,000/-. In addition, claimants are held entitled to Rs.30,000/- on account of loss of estate and funeral expenses.

¶78

The Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 9% per annum which on the face of it is on the higher side and the same is reduced to 6%.

¶79

¶80

Thus, in all, the claimants are held entitled to

¶81

a total compensation of Rs.21,17,800/- which shall carry

¶82

interest at the rate of 6% from the date of filing of the petition till the realization of the amount of compensation as against Rs.25,27,500/- awarded by the Tribunal

¶83

To the aforesaid extent the judgment awarded by the Tribunal is modified.

¶84

Amount in deposit, if any, in MFA No.3112/2016 to be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal for disbursement in accordance with law;

¶85

In the result, the appeals are disposed of.

¶86

Sd/JUDGE

¶87

Sd/-

¶88

JUDGE