Dismissed

M/S. Tata Aig General v. Sri. Rangaswamy T

Karnataka HC21 Jun 2021MFA/6402/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two appeals filed by the insurer and the deceased's family challenging the quantum of ₹17,75,000 compensation awarded by the Tribunal for a fatal road accident. The court found the award just and appropriate, dismissing both appeals and disposing of pending interjections.

What did the court decide?

Both appeals were dismissed; all pending interjections were disposed of, and the deposited amount was transferred to the Tribunal for disbursement.

M/S. Tata Aig General Vs Sri. Rangaswamy T — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 21^ST 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.6402/2017 c/w M.F.A.No.8212/2017 (MV)

¶8

IN M.F.A.No.6402/2017:

¶9

BETWEEN :

¶10

M/s TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.69, JP & DEVI JAMBUKESWAR ARCADE, 3^RD FLOOR, MILLERS ROAD, BANGALORE-560 052 REP BY REGIONAL CLAIMS MANAGER ...APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI RAVI S. SAMPRATHI, ADV.)

¶12

AND :

¶13

1 . SRI RANGASWAMY T., S/O VEERARANAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS

¶14

2 . SMT.SUSHEELA W/O RANGASWAMY T., AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

¶15

3 . R.VIJAY KUMAR S/O RANGASWAMY T., AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS

¶16

ALL ARE R/AT NO.19/1, SHARADHADEVI BUILDING, NEAR NEW AGE PUBLIC SCHOOL,

¶17

¶18

MARTHAHALLI, BENGALURU-560038.

¶19

4 . SRI M.VENKATESHA FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE RESPONDENT NO.1809, GROUND FLOOR, HSR LAYOUT, SECTOR-I, BENGALURU-560068 …RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI K.T.GURUDEVA PRASAD, ADV. FOR R-1 TO R-3; SRI J.V.CHANDRASHEKAR, ADV. FOR R-4.)

¶21

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.05.2017 PASSED IN MVC No.1030/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XV ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXIII ACMM, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU (SCCH-19), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.17,75,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION.

¶22

IN M.F.A.No.8212/2017:

¶23

BETWEEN :

¶24

1 . RANGASWAMY T., S/O VEERARANAGAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS

¶25

2 . SUSHEELA W/O RANGASWAMY T., AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS

¶26

3 . R.VIJAY KUMAR S/O RANGASWAMY T., AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS

¶27

ALL ARE R/AT NO.19/1, SHARADHADEVI BUILDING, NEAR NEW AGE PUBLIC SCHOOL, MARTHAHALLI, BENGALURU-560037. ...APPELLANTS

¶28

(BY SRI K.T.GURUDEVA PRASAD, ADV.)

¶29

- 3 -

¶30

AND :

¶31

1 . M.VENKATESHA MAJOR IN AGE, NO.1809, GROUND FLOOR, HSR LAYOUT, SECTOR-I, BENGALURU-560068

¶32

TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NO.69, JP & DEVI, JAMBUKESWARA ARCADE, 3^RD FLOOR, MILLERS ROAD, BANGALORE-560 052 REP BY ITS MANAGER …RESPONDENTS

¶33

(BY SMT.SUGUNA R. PATIL, ADV. FOR R-1; SRI RAVI S. SAMPRATHI, ADV. FOR R-2.)

¶34

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.05.2017 PASSED IN MVC No.1030/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XV ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXIII ACMM, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU (SCCH-19), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶35

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

¶36

J U D G M E N T

¶37

Since both the appeals arise out of the same accident, they are clubbed, heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

¶38

¶39

The claimants as well as the insurer are in appeal challenging the judgment and award dated 11.05.2017 passed in MVC No.1030/2015 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru (SCCH-19( [‘Tribunal’ for short].

¶40

The claimants instituted the petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (‘Act’ for short) claiming compensation for the death of Ramya.R in the road traffic accident.

¶41

It was averred in the claim petition that on 03.03.2015 at about 07.45 a.m., when the deceased

¶42

was proceeding on Schooty Pep bearing registration NoKA-03-HF-1153 as a pillion along with her friend Pavithra on the left side of Varthur main road, a BBMP lorry bearing registration No.KA-51-A-2769 [offending vehicle] driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the back side of the

¶43

¶44

Scooty Pep. Due to the said impact, deceased fell down on right side and front right wheel of the offending vehicle ran over the chest of the deceased. As a result, the victim sustained fatal injuries and died on the spot.

¶45

It was contended that the deceased was aged

¶46

about 22 years and was a student of final year MBA at MVJ college. She was earning Rs.15,000/by conducting tutorials at home for school children. She had a bright future in her career. Due to the untimely death of the deceased, the claimants are put to mental shock and agony and facing financial difficulties by losing the support of the deceased.

¶47

In response to the notice issued, respondents appeared before the Tribunal. The respondent No.1 – owner of the vehicle denying the petition averments, contended that the offending vehicle had valid certificate of registration, certificate of fitness

¶48

¶49

and permit as on the date of the alleged accident; the driver of the lorry was driving the vehicle slowly and cautiously; the accident in question occurred due to the sole negligence of the deceased.

¶50

The respondent No.2 – insurance company

¶51

contested the matter by filing the written statement. The insurer inter alia denying the manner of the accident, contended that the sole negligence of the deceased was the cause for the accident. Admitting the issuance of insurance policy as on the date of the accident and its validity, contended that the liability of the insurer is subject to the terms and conditions of the policy.

¶52

On the basis of the pleadings, issues were

¶53

framed and answered allowing the petition in part awarding total compensation of Rs.17,75,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.

¶54

¶55

Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment

¶56

and award, the insurer has filed MFA No.6402/2017 challenging the quantum of compensation awarded as exorbitant whereas the claimants have filed MFA No.8212/2017 on the ground of inadequacy.

¶57

As the challenge in both the appeals is with the quantum of compensation awarded, the income of the deceased determined by the Tribunal at Rs.10,000/- p.m., and adding 50% towards future prospects would be the main dispute. The deceased was aged about 22 years at the time of the accident and indisputedly she was the student of final year MBA at MVJ College. The documents placed on record fortifies the same. Thus, it is evident that the deceased had a bright future and unfortunately died at a very young age. There cannot be any dispute regarding the application of the multiplier of 18 and deducting 50%

¶58

¶59

towards the living and personal expenses of the deceased.

¶60

Having regard to the nature of qualification

¶61

and the bright future prospects of the deceased, if the monthly income is determined at Rs.11,000/- and awarding compensation as per the law enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others ((2017)16 SCC 680) and New India Assurance Company Limited V/s. Somwati and Others reported

¶62

in (2020)9 SCC 644, the compensation awarded under the different heads would be more or less the same or the difference if any is negligible. Viewed from any angle, the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.17,75,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of the petition till its realization cannot be held to be not a just compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶63

¶64

12. On re-appreciation of the material evidence,

¶65

we do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned judgment and award. Hence, the following:

¶66

ORDER

¶67

i] Both the appeals stand dismissed.

¶68

ii] In view of the disposal of the appeals, all pending I.As stand disposed of accordingly.

¶69