Partly allowed

M/S Royal Sundaram General v. Sri S Muninanjappa

Karnataka HC23 Apr 2021MFA/4434/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a miscellaneous first appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the High Court of Karnataka modified the Tribunal's judgment transferring liability to the insurance company. The court enhanced compensation for loss of dependency and consortium while reducing loss of estate, addressing issues of notional income and Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Appellants entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.2,65,948/- with interest; insurance company directed to deposit amount within sixty days.

M/S Royal Sundaram General Vs Sri S… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

MFA NO.200570/2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

¶7

MFA No. 200570/2018 (MV)

¶8

Between :

¶9

Smt. Shantamma W/o Late Veerappa @ Veershetty Aged about: 39 Years, Occ: Household

¶10

Bhagyalaximi D/o Late Veerappa @ Veershetty Aged about: 28 Years, Occ: Household

¶11

Bhagyashree D/o Late Veerappa @ Veershetty Aged about: 16 Years, Occ: Student Minor U/G of Appellant No.1

¶12

All are R/o Kokar-K Tq. & Dist: Bidar-585401.

¶13

... Appellants

¶14

(By Sri Santosh Biradar, Advocate)

¶15

And :

¶16

Kaviraj S/o Gunderao Patil Age: Major, Occ: Agriculture R/o Rudnoor, Tq.: Bhalki Dist: Bidar-585401

¶17

¶18

MFA NO.200570/2018

¶19

The Manager HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co. Ltd., Corporate Office 6^th Floor, Leela Business Park Andheri, Kurla Road, Andheri East Mumbai-400069.

¶20

... Respondents

¶21

(By Sri Ganesh Naik, Advocate for R1; Smt. Preeti Patil Melkundi, Advocate for R2)

¶22

This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173 (1) of Motor Vehicles Act, praying to allow the appeal modify the impugned judgment and award dated 10.05.2017 passed by the Court of the Addl. MACT and Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM at Bidar, in MVC No. 247 of 2014 and enhance the compensation as prayed for by fixing the liability on the 2^nd Respondent Insurance Co.

¶23

This appeal coming on for orders this day, the Court delivered the following:-

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

The claimants are in appeal being aggrieved by imposition of liability on the owner of the vehicle by the Additional MACT and Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Bidar by its order dated 10.05.2017 in MVC No.247/2014.

¶26

¶27

MFA NO.200570/2018

¶28

The Tribunal, after evidence and consideration of the matter, has imposed the liability on the owner of the vehicle on the ground that the driver of the vehicle did not possess a driving licence at all. The claimants are before this Court contending that the Tribunal ought to have directed the Insurance Company to pay compensation and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pappu and others Vs. Vinod Kumar Lamba and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 208.

¶29

The Tribunal after consideration of the matter awarded a sum of Rs.8,04,000/- under the following heads:

¶30

Sl.No.	Heads of accounts	Rupees (Rs.)
1	Loss of dependency	Rs.6,24,000/-
2	Loss of estate	Rs.1,00,000/-
3	Loss of love and affection	Rs.50,000/-
4	Loss of consortium	Rs.10,000/-
5	Funeral expenses	Rs.5,000/-
6	Conveyance charges	Rs.5,000/-
7	Medical expenses	Rs.10,000/-
	Total:	Rs.8,04,000/-

¶31

¶32

MFA NO.200570/2018

¶33

Smt. Preeti Patil Melkundi, learned counsel, however, would support the judgment of the Tribunal contending that what has been awarded is proper and correct.

¶34

This issue is no longer res integra . The Insurance Company would be liable to make payment and, however, recover the same from the insured in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pappu supra and the decision of

¶35

the full bench of this Court in New India

¶36

Assurance Co., Ltd., Bijapur by its Divisional Manager vs. Yallavva and another reported in ILR 2020 KAR 2239. In view of the same, the liability imposed on the owner of the vehicle is transferred to the Insurance Company, and the Insurance Company is directed to make payment of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, and recover the same from the insured.

¶37

¶38

MFA NO.200570/2018

¶39

Sri Santosh Biradar, learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the Tribunal has not taken into consideration the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) 16 SCC 618 and Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and therefore, the compensation as awarded suffers from legal infirmities and requires to be enhanced.

¶40

The accident having occurred on 20.10.2013 is not in dispute. The age of the deceased being 45 to 50 years as of the date of the accident is not in dispute. Accordingly multiplier to be taken into consideration is 13.

¶41

¶42

MFA NO.200570/2018

¶43

8. Loss of dependency:

¶44

The Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased in the year 2013 when the accident occurred to be Rs.6,000/- per month. However, the appellants contended that the said income is inadequate and not in accordance with the notional income which has been fixed for the purpose of Lokadalath. As per the said chart, the notional income of the deceased would be Rs.7,000/- per month. Hence, the Tribunal ought to have considered the said amount, which not having been considered, requires corrections at the hands of this Court. In view of the above submission and having perused the chart adopted for the purpose of Lok-adalath, the notional income as on the year of death of the deceased, in my considered view would have to be taken into consideration and as such, a sum of Rs.7,000/- is taken as the monthly income of the deceased. The deceased being 45 to 50 years as on

¶45

¶46

MFA NO.200570/2018

¶47

the date of the accident, future prospects are required to be added at the rate of 25% in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pranay Sethi’s case . Then income per month would be Rs.7,000x25%=Rs.1,750/- Rs.7,000/- + Rs.1,750/= Rs.8,750/-. The deceased being survived by three dependents, 1/3rd of the said income amounting to Rs.2,917/- is required to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. Thus, monthly income of the deceased for the purpose of calculation of loss of dependency would be Rs.5,833/-. The deceased being aged about 45 to 50 years, the applicable multiplier would be 13. Hence, the compensation on account of loss of dependency would be Rs.5,833 x 12 x 13 = Rs.9,09,948/-.

¶48

9. Loss of Consortium:

¶49

The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/towards loss of consortium to the first claimant. In

¶50

¶51

MFA NO.200570/2018

¶52

terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Magma’s case , a sum of Rs.40,000/- each is required to be awarded to the claimants towards loss of consortium. Thus, a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- is

¶53

awarded towards loss of consortium.

¶54

10. Loss of estate:

¶55

The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/towards loss of estate. The same is required to be reduced to Rs.15,000/- (1,00,000-15,000=85,000) in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in

¶56

Pranay Sethi’s case . Hence, a sum of Rs.85,000/is deducted from this head of account.

¶57

11. Funeral expenses:

¶58

The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards conveyance charges. The same is enhanced to Rs.15,000/- in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pranay Sethi’s case.

¶59

¶60

MFA NO.200570/2018

¶61

12. Medical expenses :

¶62

The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/towards medical expenses, the same being on the basis of records produced, does not require interference.

¶63

Thus, in view of the above, the comparative table of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and by this

¶64

Court is under:

¶65

Sl. No.	Heads of account	Compensation awarded by the Tribunal	Compensation awarded by this Court	Enhanced compensation
1	Loss of dependency	Rs.6,24,000/-	Rs.9,09,948/-	Rs.2,85,948/-
2	Loss of estate	Rs.1,00,000/-	Rs.15,000/-	-Rs.85,000/-
3	Loss of love and affection	Rs.50,000/-	Rs.1,20,000/-	Rs.60,000/-
4	Loss of consortium	Rs.10,000/-
5	Funeral expenses	Rs.5,000/-	Rs.15,000/-	Rs.5,000/-
6	Conveyance charges	Rs.5,000/-
7	Medical expenses	Rs.10,000/-	Rs.10,000/-	………
	Total:	Rs.8,04,000/-	Rs.10,69,948/-	Rs.2,65,948/-

¶66

14. Accordingly, I pass the following:

MFA NO.200570/2018

ORDER

i. The appeal is partly allowed.

¶71

ii. The judgment of the Tribunal in MVC No.247/2014 dated 10.05.2017 is hereby modified. The appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.2,65,948/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realization.

¶72

iii. The apportionment made by the Tribunal remains unaltered.

¶73

iv. The respondent-insurance company shall deposit the said amount within sixty days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment, failing which, the respondent/Insurance Company is liable to pay interest @ 9 % p.a. and recover the same

¶74

from the owner of the vehicle.

¶75

JUDGE

¶76

VNR

¶77

Sd/-

M/S Royal Sundaram General v. Sri S Muninanjappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Royal Sundaram General v. Sri S Muninanjappa

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

Smt. Sheela S R Vs Sri. Darmesh K R

N G E F Employees House Building Co-Op Society Vs State of Karnataka Rev Dept

Prof. S Shyama Sundar Vs State of Karnataka

Smt. Malavika Gubbivani Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Subhash Chandra Bose Vs Sri Rajesh Gowda

Sri Govindaiah Vs Sri G v Mohan Kumar