Allowed

Smt Savitri W/O Bhimappa Devihosur v. Shri Mohammed Sadath S/O Mohammed Amjad

Karnataka HC24 Jan 2024MFA/101280/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the first appeal in a motor accident case, enhancing the compensation from Rs. 11,28,400 to Rs. 16,59,800. The Court applied principles regarding future income prospects and loss of consortium where the deceased lacked proof of specific income.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 16,59,800 with 6% interest; six weeks granted to insurer to pay.

Smt Savitri W/O Bhimappa Devihosur Vs Shri Mohammed Sadath S/O… — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:1707 MFA No. 101280 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101280/2023(MV-D)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. SAVITRI W/O. BHIMAPPA DEVIHOSUR, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE.

¶10

SHRI BHIMAPPA S/O. YALLAPPA DEVIHOSUR, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,

¶11

BOTH ARE R/O: BENAKANAHALLI(PLOT), POST: KABBUR, TQ AND DIST HAVERI-581110.

¶12

…APPELLANTS

¶13

(BY SRI B. M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by SAMREEN SAMREEN AYUB AYUB DESHNUR DESHNUR Date: 2024.02.05 11:23:23 +0530

¶16

SHRI MOHAMMED SADATH S/O. MOHAMMED AMJAD, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: NEAR MANDAKKI BATI, HOLALKERRE ROAD, CHITRADURGA-577501.

¶17

(OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING REG.NO.KA-16/B-8959).

¶18

THE DEPUTY MANAGER,(LEGAL CLAIM) RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT V.A.KALABURGI SQUIRE, III FLOOR, CLUB ROAD, DESAI CROSS, HUBBALLI-580029.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI NAGARAJ C. KOLLORI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.04.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.887/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT

¶21

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1707 MFA No. 101280 of 2023

¶22

CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, HAVERI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶23

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

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Though the matter is listed for orders, by consent of parties, matter is taken up for final disposal.

¶26

The claimants in MVC No.887/2017 has preferred the present appeal challenging the validity of the said judgment dated 02.04.2019 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge and Member MACT, Haveri, with regard to the quantum of compensation.

¶27

Admitted facts which are not in dispute for disposal of the present appeal are as under:

¶28

Kumar S/o. Bhimappa Devihosur, died a accidental death on 21.02.2017 at about 3.00 p.m., in a road traffic accident involving TATA ACE vehicle bearing registration No.KA27/A-5751 and Bolero bearing registration No.KA-16/B-8959.

¶29

Claimants being the parents who are the dependents laid a claim for awarding suitable compensation on account of death of Kumar.

¶30

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1707 MFA No. 101280 of 2023

¶31

The Tribunal on considering oral and documentary evidence placed on record, allowed the claim petition in a sum of Rs.11,28,400/- on the basis of notional income and by applying proper multiplier having regard to the age of the deceased being 20 years.

¶32

Claimants being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal are in appeal.

¶33

Reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal memo Shri. B. M. Patil, learned counsel for appellants sought for enhancement of the compensation.

¶34

Per contra, Shri. Nagaraj C. Kolloori, learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company, supported the impugned judgment.

¶35

In view of the rival contentions of the parties, this Court perused the material on record meticulously.

¶36

On such perusal of the material on record, accidental death of Kumar S/o. Bhimappa Devihosur, aged about 20 years in a road traffic accident occurred on 21.02.2017 involving the aforesaid vehicles stands established by placing material evidence on record.

¶37

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1707 MFA No. 101280 of 2023

¶38

No proper proof of income is furnished by the claimant. Therefore, for the accidental death of the year 2017, the income needs to be taken in a sum of Rs.10,250/- per month.

¶39

Applying the principles of law enunciated in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in AIR 2017 SCC 5157, 40% is to be added to the income towards the future prospects. Therefore, income would be Rs.14,350/-. Since the deceased is a bachelor, 50% is to be deducted.

¶40

Accordingly, the claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.15,49,800/- towards the loss of future income.

¶41

Parents being the dependents, they are entitled to loss of consortium in a sum of Rs.40,000/- each. On the conventional head they are entitled to a sum of Rs.15,000/each. Therefore, in all, claimants would be entitled to compensation in a sum of Rs.16,59,800/-.

¶42

Accordingly, the following order is passed:

¶43

ORDER

¶44

(i) Appeal is allowed.

¶45

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:1707 MFA No. 101280 of 2023

¶46

(ii) As against sum of Rs.11,28,400/-

¶47

awarded by the Tribunal, claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.16,59,800/- with interest at the rate of

¶48

6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶49

(iii) Six weeks time is granted to the Insurance Company to pay the adjudged compensation.

¶50

(iv) Two weeks time is granted to Shri. Nagaraj C. Kolloori, to file the power in the office, if not already filed.

¶51

Sd/JUDGE

¶52

PMP/SMM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15 CT-ASC

Smt Savitri W/O Bhimappa Devihosur v. Shri Mohammed Sadath S/O Mohammed Amjad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Savitri W/O Bhimappa Devihosur v. Shri Mohammed Sadath S/O Mohammed Amjad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reliance Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd., Vs Basavva Somappa Badaradinni

Reliance Gen.Ins. Co. Ltd. Vs P. Mustahanbi W/O. Hussainasab

Venkatesh Hanumantappa Waddar @ Bhovi Vs the Divisional Manager

Smt. Faridabanu W/O. Imtiyaz Kerimani Vs Mr. Imtiyaz S/O. Akbar

The Manager, Sriram General Vs Shabbhirahamad S/O. Mahmad Haneef Tekade

Sudhakar M Vs Hannur Swamy