Allowed

M/S the Oriental Ins Co. Ltd. v. Sri T Sinivasa

Karnataka HC10 Aug 2023MFA/5359/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This First Appeal challenged the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award granting compensation for injuries sustained in a road accident caused by a vehicle driven without a valid license while the Insurance policy conditions were violated. The Court allowed the appeal in part, modifying the compensation amount and reducing the interest rate.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is allowed in part. Compensation reduced to Rs.2,44,581/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till payment.

M/S the Oriental Ins Co. Ltd. Vs Sri T Sinivasa — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:28351 MFA No. 5359 of 2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5359 OF 2012 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/S THE ORIENTAL INS COMPANY LIMITED, YEHTIRAJ MUTT BUILDING, 1^ST FLOOR, NO.199, 11^TH CROSS, SAMPIGE ROAD, MALLESHWARAM, BANGALORE - 560 003, THROUGH ITS REGIONAL OFFICE, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX, NO.44/45, RESIDENCY ROAD, BANGALORE-25, REP. BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI B S UMESH, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by JAI JYOTHI J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

SRI. T. SINIVASA, S/O LATE THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, RESIDENT AT OLD NO.949, NEW NO.490, 2^ND MAIN ROAD, BANGARAPPANAGAR, NEAR GLOBAL ACADEMY, MYSORE ROAD, RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR, BANGALORE.

¶14

SRI. CHANDRAHASA, S/O ANJANAPPA, AGE MAJOR EXACT NOT KNOWN TO APPELLANT NO.223, NAYANDAHALLI VILLAGE, BANGALORE - 560 039.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B M CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2 - NOTICE ACCEPTED THROUGH PUBLICATION R/O/DTD: 28.10.2015)

¶16

¶17

NC: 2023:KHC:28351 MFA No. 5359 of 2012

¶18

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.12.2011 PASSED IN MVC NO.2515/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT-3, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF Rs.2,66,831/- WITH INTEREST @ 8% P.A. ON Rs.2,51,881/(EXCLUDING FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES) FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT.

¶19

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

This is an appeal filed by the Insurance Company aggrieved by the award dated 14.12.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC No.2515/2008.

¶22

The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.5,31,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by the claimant in the road accident. The case of the claimant is that on 26.12.2007 at about 8:00 a.m., he was proceeding on the left side of the foot path near Ganesha Temple at Nayandahalli, Bangalore. At that time, the motor cycle came from behind in high speed with rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant. Due to the said impact, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. He was shifted to the hospital wherein he was admitted as an inpatient

¶23

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:28351 MFA No. 5359 of 2012

¶24

for more than two weeks. He had spent huge amount towards medical and other incidental expenses.

¶25

2.1. A counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the

¶26

respondents wherein the respondents have denied the manner of accident and also the injuries sustained by the claimant. The Court below held that the accident had taken place because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. When it comes to the liability, the Court has observed that the issuance of insurance policy in respect of the offending vehicle is not disputed. At the time of the accident, the driver of the offending vehicle was not having a driving license and respondent No.1 has violated the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. In support of the same, they have examined the officials as RW1, RW2 - ARTO, Rajaji Nagar, RW3 - FDA of Jnanabharathi R.T.O and got marked Exs.R1 to R7. Ex.R1 is the copy of the Insurance policy, Ex.R2 is the charge sheet, Ex.R3 is the authorization letter and Ex.R6 is register extract.

¶27

The Court below looking at the evidence of RWs 1 to 3 observed that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having a driving license. Respondent No.1 , the rider cum owner of the vehicle has not at all whispered in the written

¶28

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:28351 MFA No. 5359 of 2012

¶29

statement that he was having a valid and effective driving license at the time of the accident. Further, he has not entered into witness box and has not produced any document to show that he had a valid and effective driving license. Hence the tribunal applying the law laid down by the Apex Court in KUSUMALATHA & OTHERS vs. SATBIR & OTHERS¹ had directed the Insurance Company to pay the compensation and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle and granted a compensation of an amount of Rs.2,66,881/-.

¶30

2.2 Learned counsel for the appellant - Insurance Company submits that when there is no valid driving license as held by the Court below, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation. It is submitted that the Court below went wrong in directing the Insurance Company to pay the compensation and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle.

¶31

In the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court

¶32

in NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD. vs SWARAN SINGH²

¶33

1 AIR 2011 SC 1234

¶34

2 2004 ACJ 1

¶35

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:28351 MFA No. 5359 of 2012

¶36

even when there is violation of terms and conditions of the policy, the claimant being a third party to the policy is entitled for the compensation. The insurance company in such cases shall pay the compensation and recover the same from the owner of vehicle. The Court below has rightly applied the principle of pay and recover.

¶37

When it comes to the compensation, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that without there being any evidence, Court had taken Rs.5,000/- as the income of the claimant. It is submitted that even under the head of pain and suffering, Court below had granted an amount of Rs.50,000/-

¶38

and towards loss of amenities, tribunal had granted an amount of Rs.50,000/-. Both are on higher side. He submits that even while granting compensation towards loss of future prospects

¶39

and loss of income during the laid up period, the Court has taken Rs.5,000/- as the monthly income and arrived at an amount of Rs.1,08,000/- and Rs.15,000/- respectively. It is submitted that the compensation granted by the tribunal is on the higher side.

¶40

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:28351 MFA No. 5359 of 2012

¶41

According to the claimant, he was working as a quality controller in Garments earning Rs.8,000/- per month. He has not produced any document except his oral evidence. The Court below had taken Rs.5,000/- as his monthly income. In the opinion of this Court, applying the ratio in

¶42

RAMCHANDRAPPA vs THE MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM

¶43

ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED³ , Rs.4,500/would be the appropriate amount under the head of loss of earning during laid-up period for three months, he is entitled for an amount of Rs.13,500/-.

¶44

Towards the loss of future earnings, due to disability, if Rs.4,500/- is taken as the monthly income and the disability at 12%, the compensation would be Rs.97,200/(4,500x12x15x12/100).

¶45

He has sustained only one grievous injury i.e. fracture and the Court has granted Rs.50,000/- under the head of pain and sufferings which is on the higher side. This Court is inclined to reduce the same to Rs.40,000/- which would be an appropriate amount.

¶46

3 2011(13) SCC 236

¶47

¶48

NC: 2023:KHC:28351 MFA No. 5359 of 2012

¶49

Towards loss of amenities, the Court has already granted amount under the head of loss of future income. As it is submitted that the claimant has sustained one fracture, this Court is inclined to grant an amount of Rs.30,000/- under the head of loss of amenities.

¶50

Towards medical expenses, incidental expenses and future medical expenses amounting to Rs.43,881/-, Rs.5,000/and Rs.15,000/- respectively which is granted by the court below, is reasonable and no interference is called for.

¶51

The claimant is entitled for the compensation as

¶52

below:-

¶53

Sl. No.	Heads	Compensation Awarded (in Rs.)
1.	Towards Medical expenses	43,881.00
2.	Towards attendant, extra nourishment,incidental expenses	5,000.00
3.	Pain and suffering	40,000.00
4.	Loss of income during laid up period for 3 months	13,500.00
5.	Towards loss of amenities	30,000.00
6.	Loss of future earnings	97,200.00

¶54

¶55

NC: 2023:KHC:28351 MFA No. 5359 of 2012

¶56

7.	Future medical expenses	15,000.00
	TOTAL	2,44,581.00

¶57

It is submitted that the Court below has granted interest @ 8%. This Court is inclined to grant interest @6% p.a.

¶58

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part reducing the compensation from Rs.2,66,881/- to Rs.2,44,581/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till the date of payment.

¶59

The amount if any, deposited by the Insurance Company shall be transmitted to the Court below forthwith.

¶60

If there is any excess amount, the Insurance Company is at liberty to withdraw the same.

¶61

SD/JUDGE

¶62

BRN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21

M/S the Oriental Ins Co. Ltd. v. Sri T Sinivasa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S the Oriental Ins Co. Ltd. v. Sri T Sinivasa

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

Sri Ganesh Bhat Vs Vasantha Shetty

The Divisionl Manager Vs Ashalatha

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Sri.Manju

M/S the Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Pillamma W/O Doddamuniswamappa

Ramesh Vs Laxminarayana Bhat

Nagesh Vs C R Aravinda