Partly allowed

C. Kariyappa Alias Kariyappa S/O Late Channabasappa v. Moola Ram Choudhary S/O Gumana Ram Choushary

Karnataka HC25 Oct 2024MFA/101654/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Miscellaneous First Appeal challenged the compensation awarded in a motor accident claiming rash and negligent driving. The High Court reassessed the notional income and enhanced the total compensation to Rs.12,44,000/-, including claims for loss of dependency, funeral expenses, loss of estate, and loss of filial consortium.

What did the court decide?

The appeal allowed in part; the impugned award modified; compensation enhanced to Rs.12,44,000/- with interest at 6% p.a.; insurer directed to deposit within six weeks.

C. Kariyappa Alias Kariyappa S/O Late Channabasappa… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15599-DB MFA No. 101654 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101654 OF 2021

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

C. KARIYAPPA @ KARIYAPPA S/O. LATE CHANNABASAPPA, AGE: 45 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST.

¶8

SMT. MANJULA W/O. C. KARIYAPPA @ KARIYAPPA AGE: 43 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE.

¶9

MINOR KALYANA KUMAR @ C. KALYAN KUMAR @ K. KALYANA KUMAR S/O. C. KARIYAPPA @ KARIYAPPA, AGE: 22 YEARS,

¶10

Digitally signed by VINAYAKA B V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2024.11.05 11:28:44 +0530

¶11

C. SANIYA @ K.M. SANIYA D/O. C. KARIYAPPA @ KARIYAPPA, AGE: 11 YEARS,

¶12

ALL ARE R/O. KHANAMADUGU VILLAGE, KUDLIGI TALUK, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT GANDHI NAGAR, BALLARI - 583103.

¶13

…APPELLANTS

¶14

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH JADAI, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

MOOLA RAM CHOUDHARY S/O. GUMANA RAM CHOUDHARY, AGE: 38 YEARS, DRIVER OF LORRY BEARING NO. RJ-04/GA-1686,

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15599-DB MFA No. 101654 of 2021

¶18

R/O. DUDIYON KI DHANI, RAWATSAR TEG AND DIST. BARMER-344001, RAJASTHAN.

¶19

MULA RAM S/O. S.H. GUMANA RAM CHOUDHARY AGE: 50 YEARS, OWNER OF LORRY BEARNING NO. RJ-04/GA-1686, R/O. DUDIYON KI DHANI, RAWATSAR TEG AND DIST. BARMER-344001, RAJASTHAN.

¶20

THE MANAGER IFFICO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., 1^ST FLOOR, R.K. COMPLEX, K.C. ROAD, BALLARI-583101.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SRI. M.Y.KATAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICES TO R1 AND R2 ARE DISPENSED WITH)

¶23

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1)OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.05.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1147/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-III, BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶24

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15599-DB MFA No. 101654 of 2021

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶28

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD)

¶29

This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short) has been filed by the claimants¹ challenging the judgment and award dated 03.05.2019 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and Member, MACTIII, Ballari, in MVC No.1147/2015.

¶30

Facts giving rise to filing of the appeal briefly stated are that, on 01.03.2014 at about 9:45, one K.Sharanakumara, who is the son of claimant Nos.1 and 2, along with two others were proceeding in a goods auto bearing registration No..MH-09/CA-7626 from Chitradurga to Ujjini and when they reached NH-13 near petrol bunk, Donnehalli village, Davanagere, at that time, the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.RJ-04/GA-1686 came from Hosapete in a high speed and in a rash and negligent

¶31

1 Claimant Nos.1 and 2

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15599-DB MFA No. 101654 of 2021

¶33

manner and dashed to the auto and caused the accident. Due to said impact, K.Sharanakumara died on the spot due to accidental injures and two others were injured. The claimants contended that the deceased prior to his death was hale and healthy and was aged 19 years and he was a driver and milk vender and was earning Rs.20,000/- per month and due to his death, they suffered financially and are in mental agony. Hence, the claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation for the death of the deceased along with interest.

¶34

Upon service of notice, respondent No.3 appeared through counsel and filed written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. Though respondent No.1 appeared through counsel did not file written statement.

¶35

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter, recorded the evidence. The Tribunal, by impugned judgment and

¶36

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15599-DB MFA No. 101654 of 2021

¶37

award has partly allowed the claim petition and held that the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.6,78,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. and held respondent Nos.1 and 3 jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation but, however, held that 3^rd respondent being the insurer shall deposit the award amount. Being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, the present appeal has been filed.

¶38

Sri. Manjunath Jadai, learned counsel for the claimants has contended that, the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month by doing milk vending business but the Tribunal has assessed notional income of the deceased as Rs.6,000/- per month which is on the lower side. Secondly, he has contended that in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. V. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS [AIR 2017 SC 5157], 40% of the income has to be added towards future prospects; thirdly, he has contended that in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL

¶39

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15599-DB MFA No. 101654 of 2021

¶40

INSURANCE CO. LTD. V. NANU RAM [2018 ACJ 2782] , the

¶41

claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.40,000/each under the head ‘loss of love and affection and consortium’ and lastly, he has contended that, considering the age and avocation of the deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and on the lower side. With the above contentions, the learned counsel sought for enhancement of compensation.

¶42

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the insurance company has contended that, though the claimants have claimed that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, they have not produced any document to establish the same. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month. Secondly, he has contended that since the claimants have failed to establish the income, the Tribunal has rightly not awarded future prospects. Lastly, he has contended that considering the age and avocation of the deceased, the over all

¶43

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15599-DB MFA No. 101654 of 2021

¶44

compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.

¶45

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.

¶46

It is not in dispute that, K. Sharanakumara died in a road traffic accident occurred on 01.03.2014 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver. Though the claimants claim that deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month but failed to produce supporting documents to substantiate their claim. Therefore, in the absence of proof of income, the notional income has to be assessed. According to the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, for accidents occurred in the year 2014, the notional income of the deceased shall be taken at Rs.7,500/- p.m. To the aforesaid income, 40% has to be added on account of future prospects in view of the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in ‘PRANAY

¶47

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15599-DB MFA No. 101654 of 2021

¶48

SETHI’ (supra). Since the deceased was aged about 18 years at the time of the accident, the multiplier applicable to that age group is ‘18’. The deceased was a bachelor. Hence 50% of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. Accordingly, loss of dependency is reassessed as follows:

¶49

Rs.7,500+3,000(40%)=10,500x12x18/2=11,34,000/-

¶50

In addition, claimant Nos.1 and 2 are entitled to compensation of Rs.15,000/- towards ‘loss of estate’ and Rs.15,000/- towards ‘funeral expenses’. Claimant Nos.1 and 2/parents of the deceased are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- each under the head 'loss of filial consortium' in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of ‘Magma General Insurance’ (supra).

¶51

Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following reassessed compensation:

¶52

¶53

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15599-DB MFA No. 101654 of 2021

¶54

Heads	Amount in (Rs.)
Loss of dependency	11,34,000/-
Funeral expenses	15,000/-
Loss of estate	15,000/-
Loss of filial consortium	80,000/-
Total	12,44,000/-

¶55

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶56

ORDER

¶57

The appeal is allowed in part . The judgment and award dated 03.05.2019 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and Member MACT-III, Ballari, in MVC No.1147/2015 is modified. The claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.12,44,000/as against Rs.6,78,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The insurance company/respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date

¶58