Partly allowed

Smt. Pratibha W/O Hanumant Tikare v. Yallangouda S/O Hanamantagouda Chakalabbi

Karnataka HC25 Oct 2024MFA/104395/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimants appealed for enhancement of compensation for the death of a tailor in a motorcycle-Tata Ace collision. The court reassessed notional income at Rs.14,250 per month, applied multiplier 14 with 25% future prospects and conventional heads, enhancing compensation to Rs.24,97,400 with 6% interest.

What the court decided

AI extract

Smt. Pratibha W/O Hanumant Tikare Vs Yallangouda S/O… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15598-DB MFA No. 104395 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

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

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104395 OF 2023 (MV-D)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. PRATIBHA

¶11

W/O. HANUMANT TIKARE, AGE 37 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK.

¶12

KUMARI SAHANA D/O. HANUMANT TIKARE,

¶13

AGE 19 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT.

¶14

KUMAR VIKAS S/O. HANUMANT TIKARE, AGE 15 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT.

¶15

Digitally signed by JAGADISH T R Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench

¶16

KUMARI GAYATRI

¶17

D/O. HANUMANT TIKARE,

¶18

AGE 12 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT.

¶19

SMT SHARADA W/O. VIRUPANNA TIKARE, AGE 67 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. ALAWANDI,

¶20

TQ. KOPPAL, NOW AT NOW ALL ARE RESIDING AT R/O. PETH BAN LAXMESHWAR, TQ. LAXMESHWAR, DIST GADAG-582116. THE APPELLANT NO. 3 AND 4

¶21

¶22

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15598-DB MFA No. 104395 of 2023

¶23

ARE MINORS R/BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER AS APPAELLANT NO. 1 SMT. PRATIBHA.

¶24

…APPELLANT

¶25

(BY SRI. G. R. TURAMARI, ADVOCATE)

¶26

AND:

¶27

YALLANGOUDA

¶28

S/O. HANAMANTAGOUDA CHAKALABBI, AGE MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. KUNDRALLI, TQ. LAXMESHWAR, DIST. GADAG 582116.

¶29

THE MANAGER,

¶30

HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 1ST FLOOR, VIRUPAKSHA KRUPA, OPP. KIMS, MAIN GATE, P.B.ROAD, VIDYANAGAR, HUBBALLI, DIST. DHARWAD 580021.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI. NAGARAJ C. KOLLOORI, ADV. FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)

¶33

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC LAXMESHWAR IN MVC NO.123/2021, DATED 21.12.2022 AND ALLOW THE APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶34

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

¶35

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

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15598-DB MFA No. 104395 of 2023

¶38

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶39

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)

¶40

This appeal is filed by the claimants aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 21.12.2022 passed in M.V.C. No.123/2021 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Laxmeshwar, whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.13,35,000/- as compensation.

¶41

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.

¶42

3. Brief facts of the claimants’ case before the Tribunal are as under:

¶43

The claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Tribunal seeking compensation on account of death of Hanumantha Tikare in a road traffic accident that took place on 20.01.2021 at about 4.30 to 5:00 p.m., when the deceased Hanumantha was proceeding towards Laxmeshwar from Alawandi along with one Virupaksha Gouda in a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA26-R-0078 and when they reached near Kanavi Durgamma Temple, at that time, the driver of Tata Ace bearing registration

¶44

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15598-DB MFA No. 104395 of 2023

¶45

No.KA-25-C-5764 came from opposite direction in a high speed rash and negligent manner and having lost control over the vehicle, dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased, as a result of which, the deceased fell down, sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same at the spot. The deceased was aged about 40 years, doing tailoring work and earning a sum of Rs.20,000/- per month.

¶46

4. After service of notice before the Tribunal, the respondent/Insurer resisted the claim petition by filing written statement and denied all averments made in the claim petition.

¶47

5. The Tribunal considering the evidence on record at Exs.P1 to P14, oral evidence of PW1 and PW2, RW1 and Exs.R1 & R2, granted total compensation of Rs.13,35,000/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶48

6. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the Tribunal committed an error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- per month, inasmuch as the deceased was doing tailoring work and earning a sum of Rs.20,000/- per month. The Tribunal also committed an error

¶49

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15598-DB MFA No. 104395 of 2023

¶50

in not awarding any compensation towards loss of future prospects of the deceased, which the claimants would be entitled to 25% of the assessed income in terms of decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others¹ . He further submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the conventional heads is also on the lower side. Thus, he prays for allowing the appeal by enhancing the compensation reasonably.

¶51

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent/insurer supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded just and reasonable compensation under each heads, which does not call for interference at the hands of this Court. Thus, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.

¶52

8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the appeal papers, the only point that would arises for our consideration in this appeal is:

¶53

1 (2017) 16 SCC 680

¶54

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15598-DB MFA No. 104395 of 2023

¶55

“Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?”

¶56

9. There is no dispute with regard to the occurrence of the accident on 20.01.2021, due to rash and negligent driving of driver of Tata ACE bearing registration No.KA-25/C-5764, resulting in death of deceased Hanumantha. The Tribunal assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/per month, which is on the meager side. The accident is of the year 2021. No documentary evidence is placed on record with regard to income of the deceased. In the absence of any proof of income, taking note of Circular issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority as well as High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad, we deem it appropriate to reassess the notional income of the deceased at Rs.14,250/- per month.

¶57

10. The deceased was aged about 41 years at the time of the accident. The respondents have not disputed this aspect. As per decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sarala

¶58

Verma & Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation &

¶59

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15598-DB MFA No. 104395 of 2023

¶60

Another² , multiplier applicable to the age of the deceased is ‘14’.

¶61

11. The deceased Hanumanth died leaving behind his wife, children and mother and therefore, appropriate deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased would be 1/4^th . The Tribunal has not considered the future prospects of the deceased. As per the principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi supra, 25% of the assessed income has to be added towards future prospects. Thus, loss of dependency is reckoned as under:

¶62

Rs.14,250 + 25%(Rs.3,562.5) = 17,812.5 x ¼ = Rs.4453 Rs.17,812.5-Rs.4,453=Rs.13,359.5 x 12 x 14 = Rs.22,44,396

¶63

12. The Tribunal has committed an error in not

¶64

awarding fair compensation under the head of loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses. As per the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs Nanu Ram @ Churu Ram & Others³ and Pranay Sethi supra, the claimants are entitled to Rs.44,000/- each towards loss of

¶65

2 2009 ACJ 1298

¶66

3 2018 (18) SCC 130

¶67

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15598-DB MFA No. 104395 of 2023

¶68

consortium, Rs.16,500/- towards loss of estate and Rs.16,500/- towards funeral expenses including 10% escalation. Thus, in all, the claimants are entitled to modified compensation as under:

¶69

Loss of dependency Rs.22,44,396/Loss of consortium (Rs.44000x5) Rs. 2,20,000/Loss of estate Rs. 16,500/Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/-

¶70

-----------------Total Rs.24,97,396/Rounded off to Rs.24,97,400/------------------

¶71

13. Thus, the claimants are entitled to total

¶72

compensation of Rs.24,97,400/- as against Rs.13,35,000/awarded by the Tribunal.

¶73

14. In the result, we pass the following:

¶74

ORDER

¶75

a) The appeal filed by the claimants is allowed in part .

¶76

b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.24,97,400/- as against Rs.13,35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶77

c) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

¶78

¶79

NC: 2024:KHC-D:15598-DB MFA No. 104395 of 2023

¶80

d) Respondent/Insurer shall deposit the enhanced compensation with accrued interest before the Tribunal within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.

¶81