Partly allowed

Sri. Nanne Jan M v. Sri. Raju B M

Karnataka HC12 Jul 2021MFA/5433/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common judgment disposed of two Motor Accident Fatal Appeal Nos. arising from a road traffic accident. The High Court enhanced the compensation from Rs.4.53 lakhs to Rs.6.28 lakhs by adjusting the disability percentage and loss of income. The court also affirmed the insurer's liability to deposit the enhanced amount.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.6,28,586/-. Liability fastened on National Insurance Company to deposit within 90 days.

Sri. Nanne Jan M Vs Sri. Raju B M — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 12^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

M.F.A.No.5433/2016 c/w M.F.A.No.5047/2016 (MV)

¶8

IN M.F.A.No.5433/2016:

¶9

BETWEEN :

¶10

SRI NANNE JAN M., S/O MOHAMED HANEEF, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O JANNAPURA POST, GONIBEEDU HOBLI, MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577132 ...APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI PRADEEP NAIK K., ADV.)

¶12

AND :

¶13

1 . SRI RAJU B.M., S/O MANJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O GALIPUJE, MALLENAHALLI POST, CHIKMAGALUR TALUK, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

¶14

2 . SRI H.M.RAMACHANDRA S/O MALLEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O JANNAPURA POST, GONIBEEDU HOBLI,

¶15

- 2 -

¶16

MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577132

¶17

3 . THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., YASHORAM CHAMBERS, RATHNAGIRI ROAD, CHIKMAGALUR TOWN CHIKMAGALUR-577101

¶18

4 . THE MANAGER THE H.D.F.C. ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 6^TH FLOOR, LEELA BUSINESS PARK, ANDERI KURLA ROAD, ANDERI (E) MUMBAI-400069 …RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI N.R.RAVIKUMAR, ADV. FOR R-1 & R-2; SRI O.MAHESH, ADV. FOR R-3; SRI D.VIJAYKUMAR, ADV. FOR R-4.)

¶20

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.04.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.95/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE 2^ND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, CHIKKAMAGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶21

IN M.F.A.No.5047/2016:

¶22

BETWEEN :

¶23

SRI H.M.RAMACHANDRA S/O MALLEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O JANNAPURA POST, GONIBEEDU HOBLI, MUDIGERE TALUK CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577132 ...APPELLANT

¶24

(BY SRI N.R.RAVIKUMAR, ADV.)

¶25

¶26

AND :

¶27

1 . SRI NANNE JAN M., S/O MOHAMED HANEEF AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O JANNAPURA POST, GONIBEEDU HOBLI, MUDIGERE TALUK CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577132

¶28

2 . THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., YASHORAM CHAMBERS, RATHNAGIRI ROAD, CHIKMAGALUR TOWN, CHIKMAGALUR-577101

¶29

3 . SRI RAJU B.M., S/O MANJAIAH, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O GALIPUJE, MALLENAHALLI POST, CHIKMAGALUR TALUK CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577101

¶30

4 . THE MANAGER THE H.D.F.C. ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 6^TH FLOOR, LEELA BUSINESS PARK, ANDERI-KURLA ROAD, ANDERI (E) MUMBAI-400069 …RESPONDENTS

¶31

(BY SRI PRADEEP NAIK K., ADV. FOR R-1; SRI O.MAHESH, ADV. FOR R-2; SRI D.VIJAYKUMAR, ADV. FOR R-4; R-3 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH.)

¶32

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.04.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.95/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE 2^ND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND M.M.A.C.T, CHIKKAMAGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.4,53,466/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.

¶33

¶34

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, S. SUJATHA, J ., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶35

J U D G M E N T

¶36

Since these appeals arise out of the common

¶37

judgment relating to the same accident, the matters are clubbed together and disposed of by this common judgment.

¶38

These appeals are by the claimant as well as

¶39

the owner challenging the judgment and award dated 18.04.2016 passed in MVC No.95/2014 on the file of the II Additional District Judge and M.M.A.C.T., Chikkamagaluru (‘Tribunal’ for short).

¶40

The claimant instituted the petition under

¶41

Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident.

¶42

It was averred in the claim petition that on 24.09.2013 at about 8.15 a.m., when the

¶43

¶44

injured/claimant was returning in his Maruthi Omni Car bearing registration No.KA-02-MC-105 along with a student from Bettadamane to Jannapura, on Sakaleshpura - Mudigere road, the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.KA-21-A-9689 (offending vehicle) came from Jannapura side in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the said car, due to which the claimant and the inmate of the car, Prakruthi sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to M.G.M. Hospital, Mudigere. Thereafter, he was shifted to Father Muller’s Hospital, Mangaluru for higher treatment where he was admitted as an inpatient for 48 days and has undergone surgery with the insertion of surgical implants to the fractured parts. It was submitted that he has incurred huge medical expenses.

¶45

It was contended that prior to the accident, the claimant was hale and healthy. By doing the work as a mason, he used to earn Rs.15,000/- to

¶46

¶47

Rs.20,000/per month. The entire family was

¶48

depending upon his earnings. Due to the accidental injuries, his earning capacity has been drastically reduced. On these set of facts and grounds, the claimant sought for compensation.

¶49

Pursuant to the notice issued by the

¶50

Tribunal, the respondents appeared through their respective learned counsel. Objection statement was filed by respondent No.3 – National Insurance Company Ltd., contending that the liability, if any, is subject to the terms and conditions of the policy. It was contended that the driver of the offending vehicle (lorry) had no valid and effective driving licence to drive the lorry. The owner had authorized the driver to drive the lorry in breach of the policy conditions. As such, the insurer is not liable to indemnify the insured. The respondent No.4 – H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., admitted the issuance of policy to the Maruthi Omni

¶51

Car subject to the terms and conditions of the policy

¶52

inter alia denying the claim petition averments.

¶53

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.4,53,466/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till its deposit fastening the liability on the owner of the offending vehicle (lorry).

¶54

Being aggrieved, the registered owner of the lorry has preferred MFA No.5047/2016 challenging the liability aspect, whereas the claimant has preferred MFA

¶55

No.5433/2016 seeking for enhancement of compensation.

¶56

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the original records.

¶57

¶58

Re. liability:

¶59

The Tribunal has noticed that the driver of

¶60

the offending vehicle (lorry) had the driving licence to drive the light motor vehicle but not the transport vehicle. Though the driver of the offending vehicle (lorry) had no valid and effective driving licence to drive the said lorry, the owner has authorized the said driver to drive the lorry. Hence, the insurer is not liable to indemnify the insured - owner. The insurance policy was in force as admitted by the insurer of the lorry. Learned counsel appearing for the owner has placed on record the judgment and award passed in MVC No.57/2015 dated 24.10.2017 by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT at Mudigere, wherein the liability is fastened on the National Insurance Company - insurer of the offending vehicle (lorry) to deposit the award amount which has reached finality.

¶61

¶62

It is brought to the notice of this Court that

¶63

the National Insurance Company Ltd., has satisfied the award and the same is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the said insurance company. In view of the liability accepted by the National Insurance Company Ltd., in MVC No.57/2015 arising out of the same accident filed by the inmate of the Car, Kum. Prakruthi, the liability has to be fastened in the present case on the National Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount.

¶64

Re. Quantum of compensation.

¶65

It is borne out from the records that as per disability certificate, the claimant has suffered the following injuries:-

¶66

i) Multiple jejunal perforation (traumatic) ii) Type III Thompson and Epstein right hip dislocation;

¶67

iii) Right Schatzkur type 6 tibial plateau fracture;

¶68

iv) Partial tear or right endo achiles.

¶69

10 -

¶70

The doctor who was examined as PW.2 has

¶71

assessed the disability for the whole body at 54% for 50% restriction in the movement in the right hip joint, flexion extension, 40% adduction abduction, 60% internal and external rotation, 40% movements at the right ankle joint, 20% extension and flexion, 20% internal and external rotation. The Tribunal recording the same has observed that the claimant has not examined the doctor who treated at Father Muller’s hospital, Mangaluru. Hence, considering the disability at 18% to the whole body has computed the loss of future income with the monthly income of Rs.6,000/-. We do not find any good reason to interfere with the disability assessed by the Tribunal at 18%. Referring to the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, we deem it appropriate to redetermine the monthly income of the claimant at Rs.8,000/-. Thus applying the multiplier of ‘16’ as the

¶72

11 -

¶73

injured/claimant was aged about 35 years at the time of the accident, the loss of future income would work out to Rs.2,76,480/- (8,000 x 12 x 16 x 18%).

¶74

The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.2,08,106/- towards medical expenses, the same being based on the material evidence remains undisturbed. Compensation of Rs.28,000/- towards pain and sufferings requires to be modified having regard to the grievous nature of injuries suffered by the claimant. Accordingly, we award Rs.50,000/- towards pain and sufferings. A sum of Rs.50,000/- is awarded towards loss of amenities considering the impact of the accidental injuries for the rest of his life and the inconvenience and tribulations that has to be faced by the claimant forgoing many of the amenities of his life. Sum of Rs.24,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during laid up period. A sum of Rs.20,000/- is awarded

¶75

towards food, nourishment and conveyance as against Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶76

For the reasons aforesaid, the total

¶77

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

¶78

Sl.No.	Particulars	Amount [in Rs.]
1.	Loss of futureincome	2,76,480/-
2.	Medicalexpenditure	2,08,106/-
3.	Painand sufferings	50,000/-
4.	Loss ofamenities	50,000/-
5.	Loss of income during laid up period (8,000x3)	^24,000/-
6.	Food, nourishment and conveyance charges	20,000/-
	Total	6,28,586/-

¶79

Thus, the claimant shall be entitled to total compensation of Rs.6,28,586/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition till the date of realization fastening the liability on the National Insurance Company Ltd.,/insurer of the offending vehicle (lorry).

¶80

16. Hence, the following:

¶81

- 13 -

¶82

ORDER

¶83

i) MFA No.5433/2016 filed by the claimant is allowed in part.

¶84

ii) MFA No.5047/2016 filed by the owner is allowed.

¶85

iii) The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified and enhanced to Rs.6,28,586/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand Five Hundred and Eighty Six only) as against Rs.4,53,466/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition till its realization fastening the liability on the National Insurance Company Ltd.,/insurer of the offending vehicle (lorry). iv) The portion of the order of the Tribunal inasmuch as disbursement remains intact. v) The National Insurance Company Ltd.,/insurer of the offending vehicle (lorry) shall deposit the amount determined as aforesaid before the Tribunal within 90 days from the date of

¶86

14 -

¶87

receipt of the certified copy of the judgment and order. vi) The modified compensation amount shall be disbursed in terms of the order of the Tribunal.

¶88

vii) Draw modified award accordingly. viii) The amount in deposit in MFA No.5047/2016 shall be refunded to the appellant/owner of the lorry, after due identification and in accordance with law. ix) The Registry shall transfer the original records to the jurisdictional Tribunal forthwith.

¶89

x) All pending I.As. stand disposed of accordingly.

¶90

Sd/JUDGE

¶91

Sd/JUDGE

¶92

PMR

Sri. Nanne Jan M v. Sri. Raju B M

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Nanne Jan M v. Sri. Raju B M

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri a O Nagaraj Vs Nil

K B Chandrashekar Vs B v Kumaraiah

Smt. Swapna Reddy Vs Sri. K N Chandra Reddy

Sri K N Rangaswamy Vs Sri P M Chandra Shekar

Smt Hajira Bi Vs M/S United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Smt Bi Bi Hajira Vs M/S United India Insurance Co. Ltd.