Partly allowed

Master Yashas Gowda @ Yashas v. Kumar H.V.

Karnataka HC23 Nov 2022MFA/367/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court modified the impugned award in a Motor Accident Claim, enhancing the compensation for the minor appellant. Based on the deceased's age and lack of income proof, the court recalculated the head of loss of dependency. Additional compensation for loss of estate, love and affection, and consortium was awarded. The appeal was allowed in part, granting an enhanced amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed in part; impugned award modified; enhanced compensation of Rs. 15,93,200 awarded with 6% interest.

Master Yashas Gowda @ Yashas Vs Kumar H.V. — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

MFA No. 367 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 367 OF 2018 (MV-D)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Digitally signed by PAVITHRA B Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶9

MASTER YASHAS GOWDA @ YASHAS S/O H.V.KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS MINOR AND HENCE REPRESENTED BY HIS GRANDMOTHER AS GUARDIAN BY NAME JAYAMMA, RESIDING AT No.36/2, 10^TH MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, S.K.LAY-OUT, JNANA JYOTHI NAGARA, MALATHHALLY BANGALORE7 – 560 056. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GURUDEVA PRASAD K T, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

KUMAR H.V. S/O H.T.VEERAIAH, MAJOR IN AGE, No.36/2, 10^TH MAIN, 4^TH CROSS, S.K.LAY-OUT, JNANA JYOTHI NAGARA, MALLATHHALLY, BANGALORE – 560 056.

¶12

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY No.44, SRI.CHAMUNDESHWARI COMPLEX, NEXT TO KAMAKYA THEATER, OPPOSITE BMTC BUS DEPOT,

¶13

¶14

MFA No. 367 of 2018

¶15

BANGALORE – 560 085. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.

¶16

SARAVAN, S/O SUBRAMANI, MAJOR IN AGE, No.181, KAMARAJ STREET, GOVINDARAJANAGAR, BAGAYAM, VELLOR DISTRICT PIN CODE – 632 002.

¶17

SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BANGALORE BRANCH, S AND S CORNER BUILDING, 2^ND FLOOR, HOSPITAL BOAD, SHIVAJI NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 051. REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI H N KESHAVA PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE SRI C SHANKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 R1-SERVED, R-3 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD. 17.10.2022)

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:10.05.2017 PASSED IN MVC No.665/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE 1^ST ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MACT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

MFA No. 367 of 2018

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

This appeal is preferred by the appellants-claimants, challenging the judgment and award dated 10.05.2017, passed in MVC No.665/2014 by the I Addl. Small Causes Judge and MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-11), seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶25

Brief facts of the case are as under:

¶26

On 29.07.2013 at 10.30 p.m., the petitioner in MVC No.664/2014, deceased H S Pavithra in MVC No.665/2014 and petitioners in MVC Nos.666/2014 and 667/2014 were returning in car bearing Reg.No.KA-05-MB-3546 from Kanchi to Bangalore after purchasing silk sarees at Kanchi, as the deceased Pavithra was doing saree business. When the said car reached Natrampally, near Bharathi Dasan College, Krishnageri Highway at that time, the driver of the lorry bearing Reg.No.TN-25-F-2826 which was going ahead of the Car applied sudden break without giving any

¶27

¶28

MFA No. 367 of 2018

¶29

signal dashed on back side of the lorry, on account of which, the petitioners and deceased sustained injuries and Pavithra succumbed to the injuries on the spot. Hence, a claim petition was filed by the appellant-claimant under Section-166 of the M.V. Act, claiming compensation.

¶30

Heard the arguments advanced by the learned

¶31

counsels appearing for the parties and perused the records.

¶32

4. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal

¶33

under various heads as follows:

¶34

Head of compensation	Amount
1. Loss of dependency Rs.	5,10,000/-
2. Loss of love and Rs.	25,000/-
affection
Total Rs.	5,35,000/-

¶35

The Tribunal has taken the notional income of

¶36

the deceased at Rs.5,000/- p.m. The deceased was doing saree business earning Rs.10,000/- p.m. and has not

¶37

¶38

MFA No. 367 of 2018

¶39

produced the proof of income. The deceased was aged 28 years. In absence of proof of income, the notional income as recognized by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority has to be considered. The accident was occurred in the year 2013 and the notional income of the deceased to be considered as Rs.8,000/- p.m.

¶40

Further, as per principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance

¶41

Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi¹ and considering the age of the deceased, 40% of his monthly income is added towards ‘Loss of Future Prospects in Life’, and the appropriate multiplier to be taken is 17. Considering the size of the family of deceased, 1/3rd of her income is deducted towards her personal expenses and the remaining 2/3rd is contributed to her family. Therefore, the compensation under the head ‘Loss of Dependency’ is reassessed and quantified as follows:

¶42

1reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680

¶43

¶44

MFA No. 367 of 2018

¶45

Rs.8,000/- +3,200/- (40% of 8,000) x 2/3 x 17 x 12= Rs.15,23,200/-

¶46

Further, the Tribunal has awarded

¶47

compensation of Rs.25,000/- under the head ‘loss of love and affection’ but not awarded compensation under the heads ‘loss of estate’ and ‘funeral expenses’. As per the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of

¶48

Magma General Insurance Co.Ltd. V. Nanu Ram² , each of the legal dependent of the deceased are entitled to get Rs.40,000/- under the head 'loss of consortium'. Therefore, the compensation of Rs.40,000/- is awarded towards 'loss of consortium' and Rs.30,000/- (15,000/+15,000/-) towards 'loss of estate and funeral expenses.

¶49

Thus in all, this Court has awarded compensation under various heads as follows:

¶50

2 reported in 2018 SCC online SC 1546

¶51

¶52

MFA No. 367 of 2018

¶53

Head of compensation	Amount
1. Loss of dependency	Rs. 15,23,200/-
2. Loss of estate	Rs. 15,000/-
3. Loss of love and affection	Rs. 40,000/-
4. Towards funeral expenses	Rs. 15,000/-
Total	Rs. 15,93,200/-

¶54

Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled to total

¶55

enhanced compensation of Rs.15,93,200/- as against Rs.5,35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal and the appellantclaimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.10,58,200/- (Rs.15,93,200/- - Rs.5,35,000/-),

¶56

along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the

¶57

date of petition till the date of realization.

¶58

9. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶59

ORDER

¶60

i. Appeal is allowed in part .

¶61

ii. The judgment and award dated 10.05.2017 passed in MVC No.665/2014 by the Court of I Addl. Small

¶62

¶63

MFA No. 367 of 2018

¶64

Causes Judge and MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-11), is modified to the above extent.

¶65

iii. The appellant-claimant is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.10,58,200/- (Rs.15,93,200/- Rs.5,35,000/-), along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal.

¶66

iv. Further, the appellant-claimant is not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 134 days.

¶67

v. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay.

¶68

vi. Costs made easy.

¶69

vii. Draw award accordingly.

¶70

Sd/JUDGE

¶71

SSD

Master Yashas Gowda @ Yashas v. Kumar H.V.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Master Yashas Gowda @ Yashas v. Kumar H.V.

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

The Manager Vs Sri. Suresh

The Managing Director Vs Smt. Naseemunnissa

Mrs Channamma Vs Mr Ayaykumar P S

Mohammad Sharief Vs Jeevandas Adyanthaya

Sri Dileepa Vs Sri Subramani Y

The Branch Manager Vs Smt Shahina