Allowed

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., v. Sri. Raghu D

Karnataka HC27 Mar 2024MFA/2155/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Insurer's appeal against compensation of Rs.4,77,000 for a road death, challenging the claimant's status as adopted son and dependant. The High Court found documents proving adoption dated 2015-2016, after the 2011 accident, and the two-year delay in filing the claim, and held the evidence insufficient.

What did the court decide?

Deposited amount released to the insurance company; trial court records to be returned to the Tribunal; no costs.

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs Sri. Raghu D — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:12736 MFA No. 2155 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2155 OF 2019

¶7

(MV-D)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., VATAKARA BRANCH, AL MUBARAK BUILDING, EDODI, VATAKARA, BADAGARA, KERALA - 673 101

¶10

REPRESENTED BY THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., MOTOR THIRD PARTY CLAIMS APPEALS HUB, NO.3, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 BY ITS DULY CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY.

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR C R.,ADVOCATE)

¶13

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

AND:

¶15

SRI. RAGHU D AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, S/O LATE RANGAIAH (ADOPTED S/O LATE GUDDAIAH) R/O A HOSAHALLI VILLAGE HUTHRIDURGA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶16

SRI. RASAD AGED MAJOR, S/O SRI. MOHAMMED, R/O CHERIYAPATTAKIYIL HOUSE, KUTTIADI, KERALA - 673 508.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:12736 MFA No. 2155 of 2019

¶19

(BY V/O DATED:21.11.2023 NOTICE TO R1 HELD SUFFICIENT; V/O DATED: 17.08.2023 NOTICE TO R2 D/W)

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED23.11.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.819/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MACT-XV, KUNIGAL, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.4,77,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT.

¶21

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

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

Aggrieved by the award dated 23.11.2018,

¶24

passed in MVC No.819/2013, by the Senior Civil Judge And MACT, Kunigal the insurance company is before this court, questioning the award passed by the Tribunal.

¶25

The claim petition was filed seeking

¶26

compensation of an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- for the death of the deceased in the accident. The claimant is the adopted son of the deceased. It is the case of the claimant that on 19.11.2011 around 8.30 a.m., the deceased was standing on the left side of NH-48 with one Sannegowda. At that time a pulsar bike ridden by its rider came in a rash and negligent manner in a high speed and dashed

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:12736 MFA No. 2155 of 2019

¶28

against the deceased. Due to the said accident the deceased sustained fatal injuries and immediately taken to CHC Kunigal, where he was declared as brought dead. It is the case of the claimant that the deceased was aged 58 years and an earning amount of Rs.5,000/- from cattle business and an amount of Rs.50,000/- from agriculture operations. According to the claimant, he is the adopted son of the deceased and depending on his income. The court below had held that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motor

¶29

cycle. It is the case of the respondent – insurance company that the claimant is no where connected with the deceased that he is not the adopted son of the deceased and not depending on the deceased. Only for the purpose of claiming the compensation the petition was filed. The court below has held that the Aadhar card and other documents show that the claimant is the adopted son and even at the time of post-mortem he was present and he is the adopted son and he is depending on the deceased and

¶30

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:12736 MFA No. 2155 of 2019

¶31

granted compensation under various heads as per the

¶32

table below:

¶33

	Heads		Co	mpensation Awarded
1.	Loss of Dependency	:	Rs.	4,32,000/-
2.	Loss of Love and Affection	:	Rs.	10,000/-
3.	Loss of Estate	:	Rs.	20,000/-
4.	Funeral Expenses	:	Rs.	15,000/-
	TOTAL	:	Rs.	4,77,000/-

¶34

Learned counsel appearing for the insurance

¶35

company submits that all the documents that were considered were of the year 2016, the accident had taken place in the year 2011 nearly after two years the petition was filed. All these documents are created for the purpose of claiming the compensation and that is why they have taken two years time to file the claim petition. The court below had failed to consider the date of the documents which are much subsequent to the date of the accident i.e., 2011 and even otherwise the claimant is aged 26 years and cannot be termed as a dependant and no other

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC:12736 MFA No. 2155 of 2019

¶38

evidence was placed before the court to come to such a conclusion.

¶39

By order dated 21.11.2023 notice to respondent

¶40

No.1 is held sufficient and notice respondent No.2 is dispensed with.

¶41

Having heard the learned counsel for the

¶42

insurance company perused the entire material on record. In this case the accident had taken place on 19.11.2011. The petition was filed on 05.09.2013. The documents in support of the fact that the claimant is the adopted son of the deceased, he had relied on documents which are of the year 2015 or 2016. No documents are filed to show that he has any relationship with the deceased prior to the accident i.e., 2011. Particularly the fact that the claimant had filed a claim petition almost two years after the death of the deceased also supports the case of the insurance company.

¶43

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:12736 MFA No. 2155 of 2019

¶44

The court below though while granting the compensation, has to make a prima facie enquiry whether the claimant is the adopted son of the deceased, and whether he is depending up on the deceased. In this case the material placed before the court below is not sufficient to substantiate the fact that the claimant is the adopted

¶45

son of the deceased. In that view of the matter it is the considered opinion of this Court that the court below had failed to consider the relevant factors.

¶46

Accordingly, the appeal of the insurance

¶47

company is Allowed .

¶48

i) The amount in deposit shall be released in favour of the Insurance Company forthwith and the insurance company is at liberty to withdraw the same.

¶49

ii) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay.

¶50

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:12736 MFA No. 2155 of 2019

¶51

iii) No costs.

¶52

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

¶53

closed.

¶54

SD/JUDGE

¶55

JJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 66

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., v. Sri. Raghu D

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., v. Sri. Raghu D

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Shilpa @ Shilpa Maria Vs Sri Reni John @ Joseph

Smt. H.B.Asha Vs Sri Basavaraj Patel

Suresh N Shetty Vs Sharmila K

Sri. Nagarajappa Vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Ganesh Keerthi Vs Prakruthi Sreekanta

Sri Subramani C Vs the Manager