Partly allowed

Smt Hemavathi @ Dhanushree v. Sri Ram Gen. Insu. Co. Ltd.

Karnataka HC22 Jun 2021MFA/4156/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed an appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act for a road traffic accident causing death. The bench re-assessed the dependency loss and added consortium and estate costs, enhancing the total award.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 12,70,000 with interest at 6% p.a. on enhanced amount; original interest of 9% p.a. retained for original amount; insurance company to deposit within 90 days.

Smt Hemavathi @ Dhanushree Vs Sri Ram Gen. Insu. Co. Ltd. — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF JUNE, 2021

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH

¶7

M.F.A.No.4156/2015 (MV)

¶8

BETWEEN :

¶9

SMT.HEMAVATHI @ DHANUSHREE W/O LATE M.L.ROOPA SUNDAR NAIK, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE, R/O CHANDRANAIKA S/O HEMALANAIKA, ISAMUDRA, HOSAHATTI VILLAGE, BHARAMASAGARA HOBLI, CHITRADURGA TALUK & DISTRICT-577528. ...APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE NAGARAJA, ADV.)

¶11

AND :

¶12

1 . SRI RAM GEN. INSU. CO. LTD., BY ITS MANAGER, E-8, EPIP RIICO, SITAPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN-302022.

¶13

2 . ILIYAZKHAN D. KITTUR, S/O DAWOOD KHAN, OWNER OF VEHICLE NO.KA-30-7365, NO.61, GOUSIANAGARA, BEHIND GOUSIA TOWN, HUBLI-580028.

¶14

3 . RENUKA BAI W/O LAKSHMANA NAIKA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS

¶15

¶16

4 . PRUTHVI S/O LATE M.L.ROOPA SUNDARANAIKA, AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS, MINOR REP. BY HIS GRAND MOTHER THE RESPONDENT-3 HEREIN ABOVE.

¶17

RESPONDENT No.3 & 4 ARE R/O SRI RENUKA NILAYA, NO.3500/A/1, SHIVAGIRI, LINGARAJANAGARA (NORTH), HUNKAL, HUBLI-580031 …RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI B.C.SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADV. FOR R-1; NOTICE TO R-2 TO R-4 ARE DISPENSED WITH.)

¶19

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.02.2015 PASSED IN MVC No.524/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CJM & MACT-III, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, S. SUJATHA, J ., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

This appeal is directed against the judgment and

¶23

award dated 07.02.2015 passed in MVC No.524/2013 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, C.J.M. &

¶24

MACT-III, Chitradurga [‘Tribunal’ for short].

¶25

The claimants instituted the petition under

¶26

Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming

¶27

¶28

compensation for the death of Sri.M.S.Roopa Sundar Naik in the road traffic accident.

¶29

It was averred in the claim petition that on 24.04.2013 at about 2.45 p.m., when the deceased was riding his motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-25-EB7019 from Hosur side towards Vidhyanagara in Hubli, near Gurubhavan Hotel, the driver of truck bearing registration No.KA-30-7365 [offending vehicle] came from the back side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle. As a result, the deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to KIMS hospital at Hubli, however he succumbed to the injuries.

¶30

It was averred that the deceased was aged about 42 years and was earning Rs.50,000/- p.m., as Civil Engineer and building contractor. Due to the untimely death of the deceased, the claimants who were depending on him have lost love and affection,

¶31

¶32

dependency etc. It was further contended that the claimant No.3 was in care and custody of the claimant No.2, after the deceased obtained the decree of divorce from his first wife Smt.Janaki. Thus, it was contended that all the claimants being the dependents of the deceased, are entitled for compensation, alleging actionable negligence on the driver of the offending vehicle, claimants sought for compensation.

¶33

In response to the summons issued, respondent No.1 – owner of the offending vehicle appeared through his counsel and filed objections denying the petition averments. It was contended that the driver was holding valid and effective driving licence and hence, liability if any, has to be fixed against the respondent No.2.

¶34

The respondent No.2 – insurer appeared

¶35

through its counsel and filed objections denying the petition averments. The primary defence set up was that

¶36

- 5 -

¶37

the driver of the offending vehicle had no valid and effective driving licence. The insurer admitting the issuance of policy, contended that the liability, if any, is subject to the term and conditions of the policy.

¶38

On the basis of the pleadings, issues were framed and answered as per the reasons recorded in the impugned judgment allowing the petition in part awarding total compensation of Rs.11,20,950/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of the petition till the date of deposit.

¶39

8. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of

¶40

compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants have preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶41

Learned counsel for the appellants would contend that the compensation awarded under the different heads are abysmally low and the same

¶42

¶43

deserves to be enhanced substantially keeping in mind the settled legal principles of law vis-à-vis the material evidence on record.

¶44

Learned counsel appearing for the insurer supporting the impugned judgment and award submitted that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and there is no scope for further enhancement.

¶45

As could be seen, the sole dispute revolves

¶46

around the adequacy of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Though the claimants contended that the deceased was a Civil Engineer and was earning Rs.50,000/- p.m., no material evidence was placed to establish same. Indisputedly, the deceased was aged about 42 years at the time of the accident. Having regard to the age and the related circumstances, the Tribunal determined the monthly income of the deceased notionally at Rs.8,000/- which in our opinion

¶47

¶48

is just and reasonable. However, no future prospects has been awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, 25% of the same is added towards the future prospects. Thus, the total monthly income of the deceased would be Rs.10,000/-. Applying the multiplier of 14 and deducting 1/3^rd towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, the loss of dependency would be Rs.11,20,000/- [Rs10,000 x 12 x 14 x 2/3].

¶49

In terms of the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017)16 SCC 680 and New India Assurance Company Limited v/s. Somwati and others reported in (2020) 9 SCC 644 , the claimants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards loss of spousal consortium; Rs.40,000/- towards loss of parental consortium; Rs.40,000/- towards loss of filial consortium; Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses.

¶50

¶51

13. For the reasons aforesaid, the total

¶52

compensation awarded by the Tribunal is re-assessed as under:

¶53

Sl.No.	Particulars	Amount [in Rs.]
1.	Loss ofdependency	11,20,000/-
2.	Loss of spousal consortium	40,000/-
3.	Loss of parental consortium	40,000/-
4.	Loss of filialconsortium	40,000/-
5.	Loss ofestate	15,000/-
6.	Towards funeral expenses	15,000/-
	Total	12,70,000/-

¶54

Thus, the claimants shall be entitled to total compensation of Rs.12,70,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of the claim petition till its realization without disturbing the rate of interest at 9% p.a., awarded on Rs.11,20,950/-.

¶55

Hence, the following:

¶56

ORDER

¶57

i) Appeal is allowed in part.

¶58

¶59

ii) The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified and enhanced to Rs.12,70,000/- (Rupees Twelve lakhs seventy thousand only) as against Rs.11,20,950/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of the claim petition till its realization without disturbing the rate of interest at 9% p.a., awarded on Rs.11,20,950/-.

¶60

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

¶61

iv) The insurance company shall deposit the amount determined as aforesaid before the Tribunal within 90 days

¶62