Allowed

Sakrewwa W/O Siddappa Mang v. Shilkanadar Isaqsab Mogal

Karnataka HC26 Oct 2023MFA/23433/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed this appeal against the dismissal of a motor accident claim. The Court found the Tribunal's reasoning untenable and awarded total compensation of Rs. 7,63,600 with interest, directed to be deposited by the insurance company within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Appellants awarded total compensation of Rs. 7,63,600 with 6% p.a. interest from date of petition; respondents directed to pay within eight weeks.

Sakrewwa W/O Siddappa Mang Vs Shilkanadar Isaqsab Mogal — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:12592 MFA No. 23433 of 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.23433/2013(MV)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. SAKREWWA W/O. SIDDAPPA MANG, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: MURGUNDI, TQ: ATHANI, DIST:BELAGAVI.

¶10

SHRI SIDDAPPA S/O. RAMAPPA MANG, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC:NIL, R/O: MURGUNDI, TQ: ATHANI, DIST:BELAGAVI.

¶11

…APPELLANTS

¶12

(BY SRI ANAND L. SANDRIMANI, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI SHIKANADAR ISAQ SAB MOGAL, AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS, AT POST:GADYAL, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST:BAGALKOT.

¶15

VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Digitally signed by VIJAYALAKSHMI M KANKUPPI Date: 2023.12.08 12:44:48 +0530

¶16

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., D.O. MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI.

¶17

(BY SRI C.V.ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 IS SERVED)

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE LEARNED MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL – I, AND PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, BELAGAVI IN MVC NO.1106/2008 DATED 09.08.2010 AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE CLAIM PETITION BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶20

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

¶21

2 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12592 MFA No. 23433 of 2013

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

The present appeal is filed by the claimants questioning dismissal of claim petition and also for grant of compensation.

¶24

It is the case of the claimants that on 08.03.2008 at 3.30 pm., the deceased was hit by the tractor bearing registration No.KA-48/T-1330 and sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the injuries. Therefore, the claimants being parents of the deceased filed claim petition under Section 166 of M.V. Act. The tribunal has dismissed the claim petition on the ground that the tractor is not involved in the accident. Therefore, the present appeal is filed.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶26

The Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition on the ground that the complainant is an illiterate person who put his left hand thumb impression on the complaint and therefore suspected how he came to know about the

¶27

3 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12592 MFA No. 23433 of 2013

¶28

number of the tractor. Further, the police/investigating officer is not examined who has drawn the panchanama and there is no evidence that driver of the tractor pleaded guilty. Therefore, on these reasons, the Tribunal has dismissed the claim petition.

¶29

The accident was taken place on 08.03.2008 at 3.30 pm. Ex.P1 is the FIR and complaint in which it is stated that the complainant and deceased were working as coolies and on the date of accident, the deceased and others went to their relatives house and while returning in the jeep, the said jeep was punctured. Therefore, when the driver and others were replacing the punctured wheel, deceased was waiting by the side of the road. At that time, the tractor came and dashed the deceased. Due to which, the deceased died. This is the narration in the complaint which is given to the police on 09.03.2008. Therefore, there is no delay in lodging the complaint is found. In the complaint, the registration No. of tractor is mentioned as KA-48/T-1330. The tribunal has committed

¶30

4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12592 MFA No. 23433 of 2013

¶31

an error that the complainant is an illiterate person and he

¶32

has put his left hand thumb impression on the complaint, therefore, observing that there is any mentioning of number of the tractor in the complaint is doubtful one. This observation of the tribunal is completely erroneous. One of the inmates of the jeep might have noted down the number of tractor, accordingly, complainant stated in the complaint. This is natural course of human conduct and this is lost sight by the tribunal. Whether, the complaint is lodged on the very next day without there being any delay, it cannot be rejected unless other compelling documents are produced in negating the factum of accident and involvement of the vehicle. But, there was no contra evidence placed by the respondents suspecting the involvement of the tractor in the accident. Further, the tribunal has assigned another reason that the police official who did panchanama is not examined. This observation of tribunal is also not correct, just because police officials are not examined is not ground to suspect the involvement of the vehicle in the accident. Therefore,

¶33

5 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12592 MFA No. 23433 of 2013

¶34

the Tribunal has committed an error in considering the case and appreciating the evidence on record.

¶35

The Tribunal has committed another error that who

¶36

has informed the police regarding the involvement of tractor when in the complaint dated 09.03.2008, the complainant himself has stated the registration number of the vehicle but tribunal suspecting the case on the ground that there is no evidence who has furnished number of vehicle is completely perverse approach by the tribunal. The conviction or acquittal of the tribunal of the driver of offending vehicle is immaterial but the tribunal has observed that there is no evidence that the driver was convicted. This observation of the tribunal is not correct. Therefore, the tribunal has completely adopted a perverse approach in considering the evidence on record and the case in its entirety. Therefore, the observations and reasonings given by the tribunal are palpably erroneous and having perverse approach thus committed illegality in appreciating the evidence on record and hence the

¶37

6 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12592 MFA No. 23433 of 2013

¶38

judgment is liable to be set aside. Therefore, the judgment and award passed by the tribunal is set aside.

¶39

7. COMPENSATION:

¶40

In the present case, the deceased was aged 23 years old bachelor as on the date of accident he was doing coolie work. The accident is of the year 2008. Hence notional income is to be taken at Rs.4,250/- as recognized by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others, reported in (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680, 40% of the income is to be added towards loss of future prospects in life. Since, deceased is bachelor, 50% of income is to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. Considering the age of the deceased, the appropriate applicable multiplier is 18. Therefore loss of dependency is re-assessed and quantified at Rs.4,250/+1700(40% of 4250/-)X50/100X18X12=Rs.6,42,600-00.

¶41

7 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12592 MFA No. 23433 of 2013

¶42

In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme

¶43

Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Limited v. Nanu Ram & Others, reported in 2018 ACJ 2782 and in the case of Pranay Sethi supra, the claimants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each under the head ‘loss of consortium’, along with 10% escalation. Accordingly, Rs.88,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 2 + 10%) is awarded under the head ‘loss of consortium including loss of love and affection’.

¶44

Further, a compensation of Rs.15,000/- each is awarded under the head ‘loss of estate’ and ‘funeral and transportation’ respectively, along with 10% escalation. Therefore under these heads Rs.33,000/- (Rs.15,000 x 2 + 10%) is awarded.

¶45

Thus, the claimants would be entitled for compensation under various heads as under:

¶46

Sl.	Heads.	Amount in
No.		(Rs.)
1.	Towards loss of dependency	6,42,600-00

¶47

8 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12592 MFA No. 23433 of 2013

¶48

Towards loss of consortium 88,000-00
3. Towards loss of estate and 33,000-00
transportation of dead body &
funeral expenses.
Total: 7,63,600-00

¶49

Therefore, the claimants are entitled for

¶50

compensation of Rs.7,63,600-00 along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition till realization. The insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶51

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

¶52

ORDER

¶53

i) The appeal is allowed.

¶54

ii) The judgment and award dated 09.08.2010, passed by the MACT-I and Prl. District Judge, Belagavi, in MVC No.1106/2008 is set aside.

¶55

9 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:12592 MFA No. 23433 of 2013

¶56

iii) The claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.7,63,600-00 along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.

¶57

iv) The claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 1009 days in filing the appeal.

¶58

v) The insurance company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶59

vi) Send back the trial Court records along with a copy of this judgment.

¶60

vii) No order as to costs.

¶61

viii) Draw award accordingly.

¶62

HMB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20 CT-ASC