Allowed

Shri.Kareppa S/O Yallappa Butanavar v. Shri.Raju S/O Ningappap Patil

Karnataka HC2 Aug 2022MFA/100871/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed two miscellaneous first appeals against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award on a fatal accident involving an employee of the insurance company. The court modified the compensation amount and reduced the interest rate after finding errors in the income assessment and interest calculation.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 13,19,600/-. Interest rate reduced to 6% per annum. · Tribunal award modified.

Shri.Kareppa S/O Yallappa Butanavar Vs Shri.Raju S/O… — Consumer Protection | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

MFA No. 100871 of 2019

¶3

C/W MFA No. 104329 of 2018

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶5

DHARWAD BENCH

¶6

DATED THIS THE 02^ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2022

¶7

BEFORE

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH

¶9

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100871 OF 2019 (MV-D)

¶10

C/W

¶11

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104329 OF 2018

¶12

IN M.F.A.No.100871/2019

¶13

BETWEEN:

¶14

Digitally signedby J MAMATHA
by J MAMATHA
Location:
Dharwad
Date: 2022.08.04
15:09:02 +0530

¶15

SHRI.KAREPPA S/O YALLAPPA BUTANAVAR AGE 55 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KUTARANATTI, NOW AT NANDEMMA NAGAR, BAILHONGAL, PIN: 591110, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶16

SMT.RENUKA W/O KAREPPA BUTANAVAR AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: KUTARANATTI, NOW AT NANDEMMA NAGAR, BAILHONGAL, PIN: 591110, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶17

Digitally signedby J MAMATHA … APPELLANTS J Location: MAMATHA Dharwad (BY SRI. HANAMANT R LATUR, ADVOCATE) Date: 2022.08.04 15:09:02 +0530

¶18

AND:

¶19

SHRI.RAJU S/O NINGAPPAP PATIL AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,

¶20

¶21

MFA No. 100871 of 2019

¶22

C/W MFA No. 104329 of 2018

¶23

R/O: 142, SAMBAJI GALLI, JIJAMATA CHOWK, AT POST: KANGRALI, K.H.PI:590010, TQ and DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶24

THE GENERAL MANAGER/ MANAGER LEGAL SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 3RD FLOOR, S and S CORNER BUILDING, OPP: BOWRING AND LADY CURZON HOSPITAL, SHIVAJI NAGAR, BENGLAURUPIN: 560001. …RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI.NAGARAJ C.KALLOORI, ADVOCATE FOR R2, NOTICE TO R1 HELD SUFFICIENT)

¶26

THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.05.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.2859/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BAILHONGAL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶27

IN M.F.A.No.104329/2018

¶28

BETWEEN

¶29

1 . THE GENERAL MANAGER/ MANAGER LEGAL, SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., 3RD FLOOR, S and S CORNER BUILDING, OPP: BOWRING AND LADY CURZON HOSPITAL, SHIVAJI NAGAR, BENGALURU, REPTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY.

¶30

¶31

MFA No. 100871 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 104329 of 2018

¶32

...APPELLANT

¶33

(BY SHRI NAGARAJ C KOLLOORI, ADV.)

¶34

AND

¶35

1 . KAREPPA S/O YALLAPPA BUTANAVAR AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KUTARANATTI, NOW AT NANDEMMA NAGAR, BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591102.

¶36

2 . SMT.RENUKA W/O KAREPPA BUTANAVAR AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: KUTARANATTI, NOW AT NANDEMMA NAGAR, BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 591102.

¶37

3 . RAJU S/O NINGAPPA PATIL AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: BUSNESS, R/O: 142, SAMBHAJI GALLI, JIJAMATA CHOWK, A/P: KANGRALI K.H., TQ and DIST: BELAGAVI, PIN CODE: 590001.

¶38

….RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SHRI HANAMANT R.LATUR, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2, NOTICE TO R3 HELD SUFFICIENT)

¶40

THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.05.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.2859/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS

¶41

¶42

MFA No. 100871 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 104329 of 2018

¶43

TRIBUNAL, BAILHONGAL, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.10,73,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALISATION.

¶44

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY. THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING.

¶45

JUDGMENT

¶46

Though these matters are listed for orders, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matters are taken up for final disposal.

¶47

The factual matrix of the case of the claimants before the Tribunal is that their son Gangappa was working as a cleaner under the employment of respondent No.1 in his Ashok Leyland heavy goods vehicle bearing registration No.KA25/B-0841 and earning monthly salary of Rs.15,000/-. That on 18.10.2015 at about 10 a.m., when the deceased Gangappa was proceeding in the said vehicle, met with an accident due to the rash and negligent driving of driver of the said vehicle. As a result of the same, Gangappa sustained fatal injuries. Immediately he was shifted to A.J.Hospital, Mangalore where first aid was given to him and from there he was shifted to Government Venlock Hospital, Mangalore, for further

¶48

¶49

MFA No. 100871 of 2019

¶50

C/W MFA No. 104329 of 2018

¶51

treatment. But, he succumbed to the injuries during treatment. It is further case of the claimants that at the time of accident, their son was aged about 22 years and was hale and healthy and earning Rs.15,000/- p.m. and maintaining his family. Due to the untimely death of their son, the family has lost the bread earner of the family. Hence, the claimants filed claim petition before the Tribunal seeking for compensation.

¶52

In support of their claim, petitioner No.1 got examined himself as PW-1 and also examined one witness as PW-2 and also got marked documents Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.14. On the other hand, respondents did not examine any witness but got marked the copy of the policy as Ex.R.1. The Tribunal after assessing both oral and documentary evidence allowed the claim petition awarding compensation of Rs.10,73,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award, both the claimants as well as the Insurance Company have filed these two appeals.

¶53

Learned counsel appearing for the claimants contends that the Tribunal committed error in taking the

¶54

¶55

MFA No. 100871 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 104329 of 2018

¶56

income of the deceased at Rs.12,000/- p.m. even though he was earning Rs.15,000/- p.m. He would also submit that the Tribunal committed an error in not adding 40% towards future prospects and that the amount awarded towards love and affection and funeral expenses is very meager. Hence, the same requires to be enhanced.

¶57

Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company contends that the Tribunal has committed an error in taking the income of the deceased at Rs.12,000/- and in awarding interest at the rate of 9% p.a. He submits that the compensation awarded towards all heads is on the higher side and exorbitant. Hence, he submits that the impugned judgment and award needs interference of this Court.

¶58

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also on perusal of the material available on record, the points that arise for consideration of this Court are:

¶59

i) Whether the Tribunal committed an error in not awarding just and reasonable compensation?

¶60

¶61

MFA No. 100871 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 104329 of 2018

¶62

ii) Whether the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding exorbitant compensation as contended by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company?

¶63

iii) Whether the Tribunal has awarded higher rate of interest as contended by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company?

¶64

iv) What order?

¶65

Reg: Point Nos.1 and 2:

¶66

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is seen that there is no dispute with regard to the occurrence of the accident. But the question is only with regard to the quantum of compensation.

¶67

The claimants are the parents of the deceased and it is their claim that the deceased was working as cleaner. In order to substantiate the income of the deceased, no document is placed before the Tribunal. In the absence of any material being placed before the Court, the Court has to take into consideration the avocation of the deceased as also the year in

¶68

¶69

MFA No. 100871 of 2019

¶70

C/W MFA No. 104329 of 2018

¶71

which the accident has taken place. Hence, notional income of Rs.8,000/p.m. has to be taken into consideration.

¶72

Admittedly, the Tribunal committed an error in taking the income of the deceased at Rs.12,000/- which is on the higher side as contended by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company. However, the Tribunal has not added future prospects of 40% while assessing the loss of dependency. After adding 40%, the income comes to Rs.11,200/-. As the deceased was a bachelor, out of the said amount, 50% has to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased which comes to Rs.5,600/-. Applying the multiplier of 18, loss of dependency comes to Rs.12,09,600/- (Rs.5,600X12X18).

¶73

The claimants are also entitled for compensation under the head of loss of love and affection i.e., Rs.40,000/each which comes to Rs.80,000/-.

¶74

The claimants are also entitled to a sum of Rs.30,000/- under the head loss of estate and funeral expenses.

¶75

¶76

MFA No. 100871 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 104329 of 2018

¶77

Reg: Point No.3:

¶78

Admittedly, the accident has taken place on 18.10.2015 and the Tribunal has granted interest at the rate of 9% p.a. The Courts while granting rate of interest has to take into consideration the interest rates of the Nationalized Banks. When such being the case, the interest awarded at the rate of 9% p.a. by the Tribunal has to be reduced to 6% p.a. Hence, I answer point No.3 in the affirmative.

¶79

In view of the above discussions, I pass the following:

¶80

ORDER

¶81

i) Both the appeals are allowed, ii) The judgment and award dated 04.05.2018 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT, Bailhongal, in M.V.C.No.2859/2015 stands modified,

¶82

iii) The claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.13,19,600/as against the sum of Rs.10,73,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶83

10 -

¶84

MFA No. 100871 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 104329 of 2018

¶85

iv) The compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization.

¶86

v) The order of the Tribunal with regard to apportionment and release of the amount is undisturbed.

¶87

vi) The amount deposited by the Insurance Company is ordered to be transferred to the Tribunal forthwith

¶88

and directed to pay the difference amount within four weeks.

¶89

vii) The registry is directed to send back the TCR forthwith.

¶90

(Sd/-) JUDGE

¶91

Shri.Kareppa S/O Yallappa Butanavar v. Shri.Raju S/O Ningappap Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri.Kareppa S/O Yallappa Butanavar v. Shri.Raju S/O Ningappap Patil

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

Mr Sardar Shariff Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Natarajan Vs the State of Karntaka

Chandrashekar @ Ramchandra @ Chandru @ Chandrappa Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri.Imran Rice Mill Rep.by Sri.N.Liyakat Ali Khan Vs M/S Sahana Agencies

Sri Mallappa S/O Hanamantappa Gatti Vs Smt Kashavva W/O Mahadevappa Bajeri

The Branch Manager, Vs Chandrashekar S/O. Gurunath Revanki