Partly allowed

Sudha W/O Nagesh Jadhav, v. Manjunath Basappa Sambargi

Karnataka HC2 Sept 2022MFA/101138/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two miscellaneous first appeals against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The High Court applied Pappu vs. Vinod Kumar Lamba to hold the insurer must pay first. The appeal for lower compensation was dismissed as the award was not meager after deducting personal expenses.

What did the court decide?

Insurance Company ordered to pay compensation first and recover from insured; Appeal by claimants dismissed.

Sudha W/O Nagesh Jadhav, Vs Manjunath Basappa Sambargi — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

MFA No. 103816 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101138 of 2016

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103816/2015

¶7

C/W

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101138/2016

¶9

(MV-)

¶10

IN MFA No.103816/2015

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE, RAMDEO GALLI, BELAGAVI (INSURER OF THE MOTORCYCLE NO KA-22/EK 1166 VIDE POLICY NO.351007311260193276 VALID W.E.F

¶13

23.07.2012 TO 22.07.2013.

¶14

NOW REP BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER REGIONAL OFFICE HUBBALLI

¶15

…APPELLANT

¶16

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S ARANI, ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

SMT.SUDHA W/O NAGESH JADHAV, AGE:37 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEWIFE R/O:KAMAT GALLI, BELAGAVI

¶19

SMT.SHOBHA DASHARAT PATIL AGE:35 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD R/O:LAXMI GALLI, ZUNJAWAD

¶20

¶21

MFA No. 103816 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101138 of 2016

¶22

TQ:DIST:BELAGAVI

¶23

SRI.MANGO S/O RAMA PATIL AGE:32 YEARS, OCC:COOLIE R/O:SAMBHAJI GALLI BASTWAD(H) TQ:DIST:BELAGAVI

¶24

SRI.MANJUNATH BASAPPA SAMBARGI AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS R/O:BADAS (KH), TQ:DIST:BELAGAVI

¶25

…RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI. VITTHAL S TELI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3,

¶27

NOTICE TO R4 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶28

THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED:20.10.2015, PASSED IN MVC.NO.1738/2013, ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.3,91,000/ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.

¶29

IN MFA No.101138/2016

¶30

BETWEEN

¶31

SMT.SUDHA W/O NAGESH JADHAV, AGE:38 YEARS, OCC:HOUSE WIFE, R/O: KAMAT GALLI, BELAGAVI.

¶32

SMT.SHOBHA DASHARAT PATIL, AGE:36 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD, R/O: LAXMI GALLI, ZUNJAWAD, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶33

MANGO S/O RAMA PATIL, AGE:33 YEARS, OCC:COOLIE, R/O: SAMBHAJI GALLI, BASTAWAD (H), TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶34

…APPELLANTS

¶35

(BY SRI.VITTHAL S TELI, ADVOCATE)

¶36

¶37

MFA No. 103816 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101138 of 2016

¶38

AND

¶39

MANJUNATH BASAPPA SAMBARGI, AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O: BADAS (KH), TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶40

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE, RAMDEO GALLI, BELAGAVI.

¶41

…RESPONDENTS

¶42

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S ARANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶43

THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED:20.10.2015, PASSED IN MVC.NO.1738/2013, ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶44

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶45

JUDGMENT

¶46

Though these appeals are listed for admission today,

¶47

with the consent of both the parties, they are taken up for

¶48

final disposal.

¶49

These two appeals are filed by Insurance

¶50

Company questioning liability fastened on the Insurance Company as well as claimants seeking for enhancement of compensation.

¶51

¶52

MFA No. 103816 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101138 of 2016

¶53

Factual matrix of the case of the claimants

¶54

before the Tribunal is that mother of the claimants met with an accident and succumbed to injures due to accidental injuries. Hence, the claimants being the dependants laid a claim before the Tribunal seeking compensation.

¶55

In pursuance of the claim petition, notice was

¶56

issued against respondent Nos.1 and 2. respondent No.1 was placed exparte and respondent No.2 contested the matter and Tribunal after considering both the oral and documentary evidence on record, awarded compensation of Rs.3,91,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. and fastened liability on the Insurance Company.

¶57

The main contention of the Insurance Company

¶58

is that the rider of the motorcycle was not having driving licence and charge sheet is also filed invoking Section 3 of the Motor Vehicles Act stating that he was not having driving licence. Counsel also submits that evidence has

¶59

¶60

MFA No. 103816 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101138 of 2016

¶61

been led before the Tribunal to prove the same by examining RW.1 and Exs.R.1 to R.6-insurance policy, office copy of letters written to RTO, accused-Yallappa Mallappa Murgod and postal acknowledgments are also got marked. The Tribunal committed an error in fastening liability on the Insurance Company inspite of those documents having been produced. Hence, it requires interference of this Court.

¶62

Per contra , learned counsel for the respondents-claimants would contend that the

¶63

compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very meager and apart from that in view of the judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Pappu vs. Vinod Kumar Lamba (2018 (3) SCC 208), the Apex Court directed to pay and recover the same in a case of death of a third party. The said judgement is aptly applicable to the case on hand.

¶64

7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

¶65

and on perusal of the material on record, the owner was

¶66

¶67

MFA No. 103816 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101138 of 2016

¶68

placed exparte and he has not contested the matter and driving licence has also been not produced before the Court. However, in view of judgment in Pappu and when the claimants represent the third party and the deceased was a pedestrian and, in view of the settled law the Insurance Company has to first pay the amount and recover the same from the insured.

¶69

The other contention of the claimants before

¶70

the Court is that compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very meager. Having taken note of age of the deceased as 65 years, the Tribunal has taken income of Rs.6,000/- per month and deducted 1/3^rd towards personal expenses and quantified the compensation. Having taken note of the said fact into consideration, I do not find any ground in the appeal filed by the claimants to enhance the compensation. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:

¶71

¶72

MFA No. 103816 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101138 of 2016

¶73

ORDER

¶74

Appeal filed by the Insurance Company is allowed in part.

¶75

In modification of the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the Insurance Company is directed to first pay the compensation amount and is entitled to recover the same from the insured in the same proceedings.

¶76

Appeal filed by the claimants is dismissed.

¶77

Amount in deposit, if any, is ordered to be transferred to the Tribunal forthwith.

¶78

The registry is directed to transmit the trial court records forthwith.

¶79

SH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39

¶80

Sd/JUDGE

Sudha W/O Nagesh Jadhav, v. Manjunath Basappa Sambargi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudha W/O Nagesh Jadhav, v. Manjunath Basappa Sambargi

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

Indo Farm Equipment Ltd., Vs Andappa S/O Ningappa Naregal

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Gajanan S/O. Vasudev Malawade

Yallappa Pandappa Kadavgol Vs Smt Shantawwa D/O Gangappa Lavakki

Sharada W/O. Giriya Naik, Vs Jananeshwar Kemu Gaonkar

The Oriental Ins. Co.Ltd. Vs Gangappa S/O : Chanapa Narasannavar

Khatunbi W/O Moulasab Shabar, Vs Dadesab S/O Dawalsab Sannakki