Partly allowed

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. v. Basappa @ Basavaraj Maruti Magdum

Karnataka HC21 Aug 2023MFA/20106/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed the insurer's first appeal in part. It held that liability for the motor vehicle accident is shared equally (50% each) between the car insurer and the liable motorcycle owner. The court revised the compensation quantum by excluding permissible but non-statutory heads and approved a total of Rs. 1,26,200 with interest at 6 p.c. per annum.

What did the court decide?

Total compensation reduced to Rs. 1,26,200 with interest at 6% p.a., payable 50% by the appellant insurer and 50% by motorcycle owner.

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Vs Basappa @ Basavaraj… — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9224 MFA No. 20106 of 2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.20106/2012(MV-I)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, JANNIT HOUSE, KESHAVRAO KHADE MARG, MAHALAXMI, MUMBAI, PIN-400 034, REPRESENTED BY MANAGER LEGAL, ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BELLAD AND COMPANY LTD., 2^ND PLOT, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI S. K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE.)

¶12

AND:

¶13

Digitally signed by SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR

¶14

BASAPPA @ BASAVARAJ MARUTI MAGDUM, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE AND AGRICULTURE, R/O: NAGARMUNNOLI, TQ: CHIKKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶15

SRI DHULAPPA APPANNA YADRAVI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: SOUTH SHIVAJI NAGAR, SANGLI, STATE MAHARASHTRA.

¶16

SRI UMESH SIVAPPA MARYAI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: NAGARMUNNOLI, TALUK: CHIKKODI, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶17

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY

¶18

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:9224 MFA No. 20106 of 2012

¶19

LIMITED, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI G.N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE FOR R4; NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH; R1 AND R3 – NOTICE SERVED.)

¶22

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.08.2011, PASSED BY THE MACT AND DISTRICT JUDGE, FAST TRACK COURT-I, CHIKODI, IN M.V.C.NO.1051/2012, WITH COSTS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶23

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

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Though this appeal is listed for admission this day,

¶26

with consent of both sides, taken up for final disposal.

¶27

This appeal is filed by the ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award dated 09.08.2011, passed by the Tribunal, in MVC No.1051/2010, questioning the entire liability fixed on the owner and insurer of the car and also for reducing quantum of compensation as the compensation awarded under various heads are not permissible since the claim petition is filed under Section 163A of the M.V.Act.

¶28

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9224 MFA No. 20106 of 2012

¶29

¶30

3. Heard the arguments and perused the material

¶31

placed before the Court.

¶32

The claimant was riding the motorcycle on 02.01.2009 at about 03.00 p.m. near Kamatnur on Belagavi Chikkodi road, dashed to the car from behind as the car was moving ahead of the motorcycle, as such the claimant has suffered injuries. Therefore the claimant being the rider of the motorcycle filed a claim petition under section 163A of the M.V.Act, claiming compensation.

¶33

The tribunal has awarded compensation under various heads as follows:

¶34

Sl. No.	Heads.	Amount in (Rs.)
1.	Towards treatment.	50,000
2.	Loss of amenities and happiness.	10,000
3.	Medical expenses.	25,000
4.	Loss of earnings during treatment period.	9,000
5.	Conveyance.	5,000
6.	Nourishment.	5,000
7.	Loss of future earning.	97,200
	Total:	2,01,200

¶35

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:9224 MFA No. 20106 of 2012

¶36

The tribunal has held that the appellant who is

¶37

the insurer of the car is entirely responsible for payment of compensation to the claimant.

¶38

In the present case, the accident is between two vehicles car and motorcycle. The claimant has dashed to the car from behind and sustained injuries. The claim petition is filed under section 163A of M.V.Act, wherein the owner and insurer are also made as parties. In the claim petition, the owner and insurer are also to be held liable to pay compensation. Therefore the entire liability fastened on the appellant and the owner of the car is not correct where it is proved that two vehicles are involved in the accident. Therefore liability to pay compensation shall be fastened on both the owner and insurer of the vehicles. Therefore, 50% of liability is fixed on the appellant insurance company and 50% is fixed on the owner and insurer of the motorcycle subject to condition, if the claimant was having driving licence to drive the motorcycle.

¶39

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:9224 MFA No. 20106 of 2012

¶40

In the present case it is proved that the

¶41

claimant was not having driving licence to drive the motorcycle. Therefore, the owner of the motorcycle who is respondent No.3 alone is liable to pay 50% of compensation to the claimant and respondent No.4 insurance company is not liable to indemnify the owner of the motorcycle and to pay compensation. Therefore the judgment and award is modified to the effect that both the appellant and respondent No.3 owner of the motorcycle are liable to pay compensation (50% each) to the claimant which would be determined by this Court.

¶42

Since the claim petition is filed under section 163A of the M.V.Act, compensation can be awarded under the principle of structured formula basis as per Schedule II of the M.V.Act. Therefore the quantum of compensation is re-assessed as under:

¶43

The compensation of Rs.50,000/towards treatment, Rs.10,000/towards loss of amenities, Rs.5,000/towards conveyance, Rs.5,000/towards

¶44

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9224 MFA No. 20106 of 2012

¶45

¶46

nourishment, awarded by the tribunal are not permissible,

¶47

hence they are set aside.

¶48

A compensation of Rs.5,000/- is awarded

¶49

towards injury, pain and suffering. A compensation of Rs.15,000/- is awarded under the head medical expenses. The compensation awarded under the head loss of future earning of Rs.97,200/- is not interfered. Hence the same kept intact. The compensation of Rs.9,000/- awarded by the tribunal towards loss of income during laid up and medical treatment period is kept intact.

¶50

Thus, the claimant is entitled for total

¶51

compensation under various heads as under:

¶52

Sl. No.	Heads.	Amount in (Rs.)
1.	Towards injuries, pain and suffering.	5,000
2.	Towards medical expenses.	15,000
3.	Towards loss of income during laid up and medical treatment period.	9,000
4.	Towards loss of future earning capacity.	97,200
	Total:	1,26,200

¶53

7 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:9224 MFA No. 20106 of 2012

¶54

Therefore, the claimant is entitled for

¶55

compensation of Rs.1,26,200/- as against Rs.2,01,200/awarded by the tribunal.

¶56

Interest awarded by the tribunal on the compensation at the rate of 9% p.a. is scaled down to 6% p.a. Therefore, claimant is entitled for interest on the compensation at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition till realization.

¶57

The compensation amount shall be deposited by

¶58

the appellant insurance company and respondent No.3 owner of the motorcycle in the ratio of 50% each, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.

¶59

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶60

ORDER

¶61

i) The appeal filed by the insurance company is allowed in part.

¶62

8 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:9224 MFA No. 20106 of 2012

¶63

ii) The judgment and award dated 09.08.2011, passed by the MACT and District Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Chikodi, in MVC No.1051/2010 stands modified.

¶64

iv) The claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.1,26,200/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization, as against Rs.2,01,200/- awarded by the tribunal.

¶65

v) The appellant insurance company and respondent No.3 owner of motorcycle shall deposit the compensation amount at the ratio of 50% each, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶66

¶67

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9224 MFA No. 20106 of 2012

¶68

vi) The amount in deposit, shall be

¶69

transmitted to the tribunal forthwith, so

¶70

also a copy of this judgment.

¶71

vii) No order as to costs.

¶72

viii) Draw award accordingly.

¶73

SD/JUDGE

¶74

SSP: Para 1 MRK: Para 2 up to end List No.: 2 Sl No.: 8 CT-ASC

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. v. Basappa @ Basavaraj Maruti Magdum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. v. Basappa @ Basavaraj Maruti Magdum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Naazarin W/O.Irfan @ Mohammaedirfan Bhadakali Vs Mr.John George S/O.Putan George

National Insurnace Co. Ltd., Vs Smt.Nagatevva W/O Parasappa Kongal

National Insurnace Co. Ltd., Vs Kumari.Balavva D/O Parasappa Kongal

P.Veerabhadrappa S/O Late Lingappa, Vs Mahantesh S/O Basavaraj Hugar

Rudragouda Vs Janabai W/O Yallappa Todakar

The Divisional Manager, Vs Shri. Sanjeev @ Sanju S/O Bhima Girinaik