Partly allowed

Premamma v. H P Chandrappa

Karnataka HC9 Nov 2022MFA/6446/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed theMotor Vehicles Insurance Appeal in part, enhancing compensation awarded by the Tribunal for a motor accident death. The court recalculated loss of dependency considering future prospects and escalated loss of love and affection, ordering additional payment.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs. 6,67,800/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization.

Premamma Vs H P Chandrappa — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

1 M.F.A.No.6446/2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶4

M.F.A.NO.6446/2018 (MV-D)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

1 . PREMAMMA W/O THIPPESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,

¶7

2 . MASTER NAVEEN T S/O THIPPESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS,

¶8

BOTH ARE RESIDING AT DASANAPURA VILLAGE SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 201.

¶9

...APPELLANTS

¶10

(BY SRI.M V MAHESWARAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND

¶12

1 . H P CHANDRAPPA S/O HANUMANTHAPPA P AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT BHADRAPURA VILLAGE SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 201.

¶13

¶14

M.F.A.No.6446/2018

¶15

2 . HANUMANTHAPPA S/O DODDADURGAPPA MAJOR R/AT BHADRAPURA VILLAGE SHIKARIPURA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT - 577 201.

¶16

3 . THE BRANCH MANAGER ROYAL SUDARAM ALLIANCE INS CO LTD., 1^ST FLOOR, PRATAP ARCADE NEAR JAIL CIRCLE SHIVAMOGGA - 577 201.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. H.S.LINGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R3, R1-SERVED, R2-NOTICE DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD:25.08.2022 )

¶19

THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:10.07.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.885/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, AMACT-15, SHIKARIPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

The present appeal is filed by the

¶23

appellants/claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 10.07.2017 in MVC.No.885/2015 passed

¶24

¶25

M.F.A.No.6446/2018

¶26

by the Senior Civil Judge & AMACT-15 at Shikaripura, for seeking enhancement of the compensation.

¶27

Brief facts of the case are that, on 16.04.2015 at about 3.00 pm., when the deceased Chethana T., was riding the Bajaj Platina Two Wheeler bearing Reg.No.KA-15/K-4358 from Shivamogga to Shikaripura and when he reached in front of Padmashri petrol bunk, S.S.Road, Shikaripura, the 1^st respondent being the driver of the Tractor bearing Reg.No.KA-15/TZ-001614/2014-15 came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the bike of the deceased and due to which, he sustained grievous injuries over his ear, eye, forehead, right shoulder, left thigh, knee, right leg, scalp, skull etc., and succumbed to the injuries.

¶28

The claimants being the legal heirs of the deceased filed a claim petition under Section 166 of M.V.Act., claiming compensation before the Tribunal.

¶29

¶30

M.F.A.No.6446/2018

¶31

The Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition and awarded compensation of Rs.8,31,000/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization. Being aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed before this Court.

¶32

The Tribunal has awarded the

¶33

compensation under various heads as follows:

¶34

1.	Loss of estate	Rs.25,000/-
2.	Transportation and funeral expenses	Rs.25,000/-
3.	Loss of love and affection	Rs.25,000/-
4.	Loss of dependency	Rs.7,56,000/-
	TOTAL	Rs.8,31,000/-

¶35

In the present case, the deceased was

¶36

aged 15 years old student. The Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.7,000/- per month and without addition of income towards future prospects in life has awarded compensation of Rs.7,56,000/- under the head loss of dependency, which is on the lesser side by not following the principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Hence, it is to be

¶37

¶38

M.F.A.No.6446/2018

¶39

modified and on other heads also, compensation has to be determined.

¶40

In the present case, the deceased was

¶41

aged about 15 years and even considering as a nonearning member of the family, but within a period of 2 years, he would have attained the age of majority and might have started earning. Therefore, it is just and proper to take notional income at Rs.9,000/- per month as per the Notional Income Chart recognized by the Karnataka State Legal Service Authority and 50% of income is to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. As per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi¹ , 40% of income is to be added towards loss of future prospects in life considering the age of the deceased and the appropriate multiplier applicable is “18”. Therefore,

¶42

1 (2017) 16 SCC 680

¶43

¶44

M.F.A.No.6446/2018

¶45

the loss of dependency and loss of future prospects in life is re-assessed and quantified as follows:

¶46

Rs.9,000/- + Rs.3,600/- (40% of Rs.9,000/-) =Rs.12,600/Rs.12,600/- x 50% x 18 x 12 = Rs.13,60,800/-

¶47

Accordingly, Rs.13,60,800/- is awarded under

¶48

the head loss of dependency and loss of future prospects in life.

¶49

The compensation of Rs.25,000/- awarded under the head loss of love and affection is on the lesser side. As per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Limited v. Nanu Ram & Others² , each legal dependents are entitled for Rs.40,000/towards loss of consortium and 10% is to be escalated. Hence, the claimants being the mother and brother of the deceased are entitled for Rs.88,000/- (Rs.80,000/- + 10% of Rs.80,000/-) under the head

¶50

2 2018 ACJ 2782

¶51

¶52

M.F.A.No.6446/2018

¶53

loss of consortium including loss of love and affection.

¶54

The compensation amount awarded under

¶55

other heads is found to be just and proper, which needs no interference. Hence, they are kept in tact.

¶56

Thus, in all, the appellants/claimants

¶57

entitled to the compensation as follows:

¶58

1.	Loss of estate	Rs.25,000/-	Kept in tact
2.	Transportation and funeral expenses	Rs.25,000/-	Kept in tact
3.	Loss of consortium and love and affection	Rs.88,000/-
4.	Loss of dependency	Rs.13,60,800/-
	TOTAL	Rs.14,98,800/-

¶59

The Tribunal has awarded compensation of

¶60

Rs.8,31,000/-, but the appellants/claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.14,98,800/- . Hence, the appellants/claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.6,67,800/- (Rs.14,98,800/- - Rs.8,31,000/-). Therefore, the appellants/claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.6,67,800/- along with interest at

¶61

¶62

M.F.A.No.6446/2018

¶63

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. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶64

ORDER

¶65

The appeal is allowed-in-part .

¶66

The impugned judgment and award dated 10.07.2017 in MVC.No.885/2015 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & AMACT-15 at Shikaripura, is modified to the extent that the appellants/claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.6,67,800/- along with the rate of interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal.

¶67

Draw award accordingly.

¶68

No order as to costs.

¶69

¶70

M.F.A.No.6446/2018

¶71

The appellants/claimants are not entitled for interest for the delay period of 184 days in filing the appeal.

¶72

Registry is directed to transmit the TCR along with a copy of this order to the Tribunal.

¶73

Sd/JUDGE

¶74

Premamma v. H P Chandrappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Premamma v. H P Chandrappa

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

Neelakantappa Puttappagowda Vs the Divisional Manager

Smt. Godaivalli Vs the Managing Director

National Insurance Co.Ltd Vs Sri. Venkatachalapathi

Smt K M Yashodamma Vs Sri Richard Wilson

Smt K M Yashodamma Vs Sri Richard Wilson

Master Santhosh T Vs Sri Richard Wilson