Partly allowed

Smt. Puttadevamma v. Harisha

Karnataka HC22 Oct 2024MFA/1143/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a miscellaneous first appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award, the High Court of Karnataka enhanced the compensation awarded to the dependants of a deceased individual, holding the Tribunal's assessment of income to be on the lower side and applying a multiplier based on Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs. 2,94,200/- with interest at 6% p.a. to be deposited by the insurer.

Smt. Puttadevamma Vs Harisha — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:42272-DB MFA No.1143/2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1143/2018 (MV-D)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. PUTTADEVAMMA W/O LATE SUBBANNA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS

¶10

JAYAKUMARA S/O LATE SUBBANNA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS.

¶11

HARISH

¶12

Digitally signed by K S RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

S/O LATE SUBBANNA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

¶14

ALL ARE RESIDING AT DEVEERAMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI NANJANGUD TALUK-571301.

¶15

…APPELLANTS

¶16

(BY SRI. RAGHU R, ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

HARISHA S/O SWAMY H.P AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS RESIDENT OF LINGAYATH STREET HANGALA VILLAGE GUNDLUPET TALUK-571111.

¶19

M. LATISH KUMAR S/O MARI K. NAYAR AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS NO.26, MIG, 54/B, 4^TH MAIN ROAD 1^ST CROSS, 1 & B BLOCK RAMAKRISHNAGAR MYSURU - 570022.

¶20

¶21

NC: 2024:KHC:42272-DB MFA No.1143/2018

¶22

3. RELIANCE GENERAL

¶23

INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED NO.36/D, 1^ST FLOOR, MYSORE TRADE CENTRE, OPP KSRTC BUS STAND MYSORE - 570001 POLICY NO.1403552334000354 VALID FROM 15-2-2015 TO 14-2-2016 MYSURU 570001.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. ASHOK N PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3

¶26

R1 & R2 ARE SERVED)

¶27

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.10.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.825/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, MACT AT NANJANGUD, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶28

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

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶30

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶31

(PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL)

¶32

Though the matter has come up for admission, with

¶33

consent of both side, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

¶34

"Whether the compensation awarded to the appellants/claimants by the impugned award is just?” is the question involved in this case.

¶35

The appellants were claimant Nos.1 to 3 and respondents were respondent Nos.1 to 3 in MVC.No.825/2016

¶36

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:42272-DB MFA No.1143/2018

¶37

before the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC and MACT, Nanjangud. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to henceforth according to their ranks before the Tribunal.

¶38

Claimant No.1 is wife, claimant Nos.2 and 3 are children of deceased Subbanna. On 08.12.2015, at 6:45 p.m., when Subbanna was proceeding on his bicycle near Deveerammanahalli gate while waiting to cross the road, lorry bearing No. KA-09-B-8028 driven by respondent No.1 hit the bicycle of Subbanna and caused him grievous injuries. Immediately the injured was shifted to Government Hospital, Nanjangud and from there he was shifted to JSS Hospital, Mysuru for higher treatment. On 09.12.2015 he succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. At the relevant time, respondent Nos.1 and 2 were the driver and owner respectively of the offending lorry and respondent No.3 was the insurer of the same.

¶39

Claimants filed MVC.No.825/2016 before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.53,00,000/- on the ground that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month by trading in banana and they were all dependent on his

¶40

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:42272-DB MFA No.1143/2018

¶41

income. They claimed that due to his death they have suffered

¶42

damages to the tune of Rs.53,00,000/-.

¶43

Respondent Nos.1 and 2 did not contest the petition. Only respondent No.3 insurer contested the petition denying rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry, age, occupation, income of the deceased and its liability to pay the compensation. Respondent No.3 further contended that the driver of the lorry was not holding effective driving license and vehicle had no permit and fitness certificate etc., thereby there is violation of condition of the policy.

¶44

In support of their claim, claimants got examined claimant No.3 as PW1 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P24. Respondents did not adduce any evidence. The Tribunal on hearing both the parties by the impugned award held that the accident occurred due to the actionable negligence on the part of respondent No.1/the driver of the lorry. The Tribunal considered the age of the deceased as 51 years, notionally assessed his income at Rs.6,500/- per month, deducted 1/3^rd

¶45

from his income towards personal expenses, applied 11 multiplier and assessed the damages on the head of loss of

¶46

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:42272-DB MFA No.1143/2018

¶47

dependency at Rs.5,72,000/-. The Tribunal in all awarded

¶48

compensation of Rs.7,61,760/- on different heads as below:

¶49

Sl.	Particulars	Compensation
No.		awarded in Rs.
1.	Loss of dependency	5,72,000/-
2.	Loss of Consortium	50,000/-
3.	Loss of Love & Affection	50,000/-
4.	Loss of Estate	50,000/-
5.	Medical expenses	19,760/-
6.	Funeral and other expenses	20,000/-
	Total	Rs.7,61,760/-

¶50

Tribunal rejected the contention of respondent No.3

¶51

insurer about violation of the policy condition and directed to deposit the compensation amount. Claimants/appellants have challenged the award questioning the adequacy of the compensation awarded.

¶52

Sri. Raghu R., learned counsel for the appellants submits that the income assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side and the Tribunal ought to have added future prospects to the income of the deceased.

¶53

Sri Ashok N Patil, learned Counsel for respondent No.3 submits that since there was no proof of actual income,

¶54

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:42272-DB MFA No.1143/2018

¶55

the Tribunal was justified in assessing income at Rs.6,500/- per

¶56

month.

¶57

Analysis

¶58

The fact that the claimants were the dependants of the deceased, he was trading in banana and he was their bread winner, was not disputed. At the time of accident, deceased was aged 51 years and hale and healthy. Considering the cost of living and prevailing wage rates during relevant period, notional income assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side. It should have been minimum at Rs.9,000/- per month.

¶59

In view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs . Pranay Sethi and Others¹ and having regard to the age and employment of the deceased, future prospects at the rate of 10% of the income of the deceased has to be added to his income. As he had three dependants, 1/3^rd of the income of the deceased has to be deducted for his personal expenses. Therefore, his monthly contribution to family comes to Rs.6,600/-(9000+900=9,900 x 2/3). Applicable multiplier is 11.

¶60

1(2017) 16 SCC 680

¶61

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:42272-DB MFA No.1143/2018

¶62

Therefore, compensation payable on the head of loss of

¶63

dependency comes to Rs.8,71,200/- (6,600x12x11).

¶64

In view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Pranay Sethi ’ s referred to supra and

¶65

Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram &Ors² , each of the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.40,000/- on the head of consortium with escalation of 10%.

¶66

Similarly, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.15,000/- on the heads of funeral expenses and loss of estate with escalation at 10%, which comes to Rs.16,500/- on each head. Medical expenses awarded was based on the evidence adduced. Therefore, the just compensation payable is

¶67

as follows:

¶68

Particulars	Amount (Rs.)
Loss of dependency	8,71,200/-
Loss of consortium	1,32,000/-
Loss of estate	16,500/-
Funeral expenses	16,500/-
Medical expenses	19,760/-
Total	10,55,960/-
Awarded by Tribunal	7,61,760/-
Enhanced compensation	2,94,200/-