Partly allowed

Chandru v. Venkatesha S

Karnataka HC13 Jul 2021MFA/9015/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Full Bench allowed the appeal partly, modifying the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for death in a motor accident. The court enhanced the total compensation from Rs.8,21,800 to Rs.14,16,000 by re-assessing the deceased's monthly income and applying statutory principles.

What did the court decide?

Total compensation enhanced to Rs.14,16,000 with interest at 6% on the enhanced amount and 9% on the original award from the date of petition.

Chandru Vs Venkatesha S — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 13^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.9015/2017 (MV)

¶8

BETWEEN :

¶9

1 . CHANDRU

¶10

S/O LATE KEMPUJIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS

¶11

2 . LEELAVATHI W/O CHANDRU

¶12

AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

¶13

3 . C.GANESHA, (DEAD) S/O CHANDRU NO LEGAL HEIRS, SINCE NOT MARRIED.

¶14

ALL ARE R/AT BOVI COLONY MANDYA, PANDAVAPURA ROAD PANDAVAPUR TOWN & TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571458 ...APPELLANTS

¶15

(BY SRI P.S.DIVAKAR, ADV.)

¶16

AND :

¶17

1 . VENKATESHA S., S/O LATE SHIVANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS ASHWINI MESS OWNER VIJAYA BANK OPPOSITE PANDAVAPURA TOWN & TALUK

¶18

- 2 -

¶19

MANDYA DISTRICT-571458

¶20

2 . THE MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.42/1, CHANDRA COMPLEX 1^ST FLOOR, KALIDASA ROAD V.V.MOHALLA, MANDYA DISTRICT-571458 …RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI A.RAVISHANKAR, ADV. FOR R-2; NOTICE TO R-1 DISPENSED WITH.)

¶22

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.09.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.1386/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, PANDAVAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶23

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

¶24

J U D G M E N T

¶25

This appeal is directed against the judgment and

¶26

award dated 26.9.2016 passed in MVC No.1386/2014 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Pandavapura [Tribunal for short].

¶27

The claimants instituted the petition under

¶28

Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation for the death of Shivaraju in the road

¶29

traffic accident.

¶30

¶31

It was contended that on 27.3.2014 at about

¶32

8.30 p.m., when the deceased was proceeding in Hero Honda bike bearing registration No.KA-09-L-5382 on Pandavapura-Mysore main road, near New Land Dabha,

¶33

a Hero Honda Splendor Plus motor bike bearing registration No.KA-11-Y-9439 (offending vehicle) driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner came and dashed to the motor bike in which the deceased was travelling. As a result, the deceased sustained grievous injuries. Immediately he was shifted to hospital and thereafter he died after three months as he failed to respond to the medical treatment.

¶34

It was contended that the deceased was aged about 21 years and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month by doing milk vending, newspaper distributing and also working at a Dabha. Due to the sudden death of the deceased, the claimants being the parents and younger brother of the deceased sought for compensation

¶35

¶36

alleging actionable negligence on the rider of the offending vehicle.

¶37

It was further contended that they had incurred huge medical expenses apart from other incidental expenses.

¶38

Pursuant to the issuance of notice, respondent No.2-insurer appeared and filed written statement denying the petition averments. The defence set up was that the accident occurred due to contributory negligence on the part of the deceased himself. Further it was contended that the rider of the offending vehicle had no valid and effective driving licence to drive the vehicle on the date of the accident; the compensation claimed is high and exorbitant.

¶39

On the basis of the pleadings, issues were framed and answered by the Tribunal allowing the petition in part awarding total compensation of Rs.8,21,800/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of the petition till the date of deposit.

¶40

- 5 -

¶41

8. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of

¶42

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

¶43

Learned counsel for the appellants submit

¶44

that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is too meager and the same requires to be enhanced having regard to the material evidence on record.

¶45

Learned counsel for the insurer justifying the impugned judgment and award submitted that there is no scope for further enhancement as the Tribunal has anaylsed the evidence in extenso while awarding just compensation.

¶46

We have carefully considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material on record.

¶47

The factum of accident and the death of the victim are not in dispute. Though the claimants contended that the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/per month, in the absence of substantial evidence, the

¶48

¶49

Tribunal has determined the monthly income notionally at Rs.5,000/-. Having regard to the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, it is safe to re-determine the monthly income at Rs.8,500/-. 40% of the income requires to be added towards future prospects in terms of the legal principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017)16 SCC 680 . Deducting 50% towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased as he was a bachelor, applying the multiplier of 18, loss of dependency works out to Rs.12,85,200/- (Rs.8500 + 40% x 12 x 18 x ½).

¶50

In terms of the ruling of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pranay Sethi , supra, and New India Assurance Company Limited V/s. Somwati and Others reported in (2020)9 SCC 644 , the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.1,10,000/- under the conventional heads. As the medical expenses of

¶51

¶52

Rs.20,800/- awarded by the Tribunal is based on

¶53

material evidence, the same remains unaltered.

¶54

For the aforesaid reasons, compensation is re-

¶55

assessed as under:

¶56

Sl.No.	Particulars	Amount[in Rs.]
1.	Loss ofdependency	12,85,200
2.	Loss of filial consortium (Rs.40000 to each parent)	80,000
3.	Loss of Estate	15,000
4.	Funeralexpenses	15,000
5.	Medicalexpenses	20,800
	Total	14,16,000

¶57

Thus in all, the claimants are entitled to total

¶58

compensation of Rs.14,16,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. on the enhanced compensation without disturbing the

¶59

rate of interest @ 9% p.a. awarded on Rs.8,21,800/- by the Tribunal from the date of petition till the date of deposit.

¶60

Hence, the following:

¶61

ORDER

¶62

i) The appeal is allowed in part.

¶63

- 8 -

¶64

ii) The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified and enhanced to Rs.14,16,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lakhs Sixteen Thousand only) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation without disturbing the rate of interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the compensation amount of Rs.8,21,800/- awarded by the Tribunal subject to clause (iii).

¶65

iii) The claimants shall not be entitled for interest for the delay period of 337 days in filing the appeal before this Court vide order dated 13.07.2021.

¶66

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

¶67

v) The insurance company shall deposit the amount determined as aforesaid before the Tribunal within 90 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment and order.

¶68

¶69

vi) The modified compensation amount shall be apportioned and disbursed in terms of the order of the Tribunal.

¶70

vii) Draw modified award accordingly.

¶71

viii) Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of accordingly.

¶72

Sd/JUDGE

¶73

Sd/JUDGE

¶74