Partly allowed

P. Renuka W/O. Late P. Rudramuni v. Kodanda Rama @ Ramudu S/O. K. Ganganna

Karnataka HC13 Nov 2024MFA/23834/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal by a deceased technician's wife and children seeking enhancement of motor accident compensation. Applying future prospects at 50% and revised heads per Supreme Court precedent, the court enhanced compensation to ₹29,22,156, awarding ₹10,39,120 more with interest.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of ₹10,39,120 with 6% interest, payable by respondent No.3 insurer within six weeks.

P. Renuka W/O. Late P. Rudramuni Vs Kodanda Rama @… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:16575 MFA No. 23834 of 2012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.23834 OF 2012 (MV-D)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SMT. P. RENUKA W/O. LATE P. RUDRAMUNI , AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WIFE.

¶10

PAWAN S/O. LATE P. RUDRAMUNI, AGE: 08 YEARS.

¶11

ABHISHEK S/O. LATE P. RUDRAMUNI , AGE: 06 YEARS ALL ARE R/O: THORANGALU, TQ: SANDUR, DIST: BELLARI. PETITIONER NO.2 AND 3 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL MOTHER PETITIONER NO.2 …APPELLANTS

¶12

(BY SRI J. M. ANIL KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by SAROJA HANGARAKI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

KODANDA RAMA @ RAMUDU S/O. K. GANGANNA, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: 15^TH WARD CHITWADIGI, HOSPET, DIST: BELLARY.

¶16

G. CHINNABASAPPA S/O. ANJINEYA , AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF THE VEHICLE, R/O: ANKALAMMA TEMPLE, THORANGALLU, TQ: SONDUR, DIST: BELLARI.

¶17

M/S. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGERMAIN ROAD, PARVATI NAGAR, BELLARI. …RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SMT. RATNAMALA G.H., ADVOCATE FOR SRI B.M.ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 ARE DISPENSED WITH)

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC-D:16575 MFA No. 23834 of 2012

¶21

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACTS, PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL – JUDGE AND JMFC HOSPET IN M.V.C.NO.200/2010 DATED 22.08.2011 AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE CLAIM PETITION, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.,

¶22

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER SUBMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA)

¶26

The above appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988¹ challenging the judgment and award dated 22.08.2011 passed in MVC No.200/2010 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hospet² .

¶27

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred as per their rank before the Tribunal.

¶28

The Tribunal, by its judgment and award dated 22.08.2011, has awarded a total compensation of

¶29

1 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1988’

¶30

2 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’

¶31

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16575 MFA No. 23834 of 2012

¶32

₹18,83,036/- together with interest at 6% per annum. Seeking for enhancement of compensation, the present appeal is filed by the claimants.

¶33

The finding of the Tribunal on negligence and liability has not been challenged. Hence, the only question that arises for consideration in the present appeal is with regard to the quantum of compensation awarded.

¶34

The claimants are the wife and children of deceased P. Rudramuni³ who died in a road traffic accident dated 03.10.2009. The deceased was aged 27 years as on

¶35

the date of accident and was employed as a Senior Technician Grade-I at JVSL Ltd., Thoranagallu. The Tribunal after deducting personal expenses has assessed

¶36

the monthly income of the deceased at ₹9,059/- per month. The Tribunal has also applied the appropriate multiplier of 17. The assessment made by the Tribunal with regard to the monthly income and multiplier is just and proper.

¶37

3 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’

¶38

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16575 MFA No. 23834 of 2012

¶39

Having regard to the judgment of the

¶40

Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the

¶41

case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranaya Sethi and others,⁴ 50% of income of the deceased is required to be taken towards future prospects. The compensation in respect of the other heads is required to be granted in terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of United India Insurance Company Limited Vs. Satinder Kaur and Others⁵ .

¶42

In view of the aforementioned, the

¶43

compensation is re-assessed as follows:

¶44

i) For the purpose of loss of dependency the income is taken as [₹9,059 + 50% = ₹13,588.5] = ₹13,589/-. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for compensation on the head of loss of dependency at (₹13,589 x 12 x 17) = ₹27,72,156 /- as against ₹18,48,036/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶45

4 (2017) 16 SCC 680

¶46

5 AIR 2020 SC 3076

¶47

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16575 MFA No. 23834 of 2012

¶48

ii) Loss of Consortium is re-assessed as (₹40,000 x 3) = ₹1,20,000/- as against ₹10,000/awarded by the Tribunal.

¶49

iii) A compensation of ₹15,000/- each is awarded towards loss of estate and funeral expenses as against ₹10,000/and ₹5,000/awarded by the Tribunal respectively.

¶50

iv) Since assessment of compensation is made as aforementioned, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of loss of love and affection is set

¶51

aside.

¶52

compensation is re-assessed as follows:

¶53

Sl.No.	Heads	Amount awarded by the Tribunal	Amount awarded by this Court
1.	Loss of dependency	18,48,036.00	27,72,156.00
2.	Loss of Love and affection	10,000.00	-----
3	Loss of consortium	10,000.00	1,20,000.00
4.	Loss of estate	10,000.00	15,000.00
5.	Funeral expenses	5,000.00	15,000.00
	Total	18,83,036.00	29,22,156.00

¶54

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:16575 MFA No. 23834 of 2012

¶55

Hence, the appellants/claimants are entitled to total compensation of ₹29,22,156/as against ₹18,83,036.00/awarded by the Tribunal i.e., an enhancement of ₹10,39,120/- along with the interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of payment.

¶56

In view of the aforementioned, the following:

¶57

ORDER

¶58

i) The above appeal is allowed in part ;

¶59

ii) The judgment and award dated 20.08.2011 passed in MVC No.200/2010 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Hospet, is modified to the extent stated herein. In all other respects, the judgment and award of the Tribunal remains unaltered.

¶60

iii) The claimants are entitled to a further compensation of ₹10,39,120/- along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal;

¶61

¶62

NC: 2024:KHC-D:16575 MFA No. 23834 of 2012

¶63

iv) Respondent No.3/Insurance Company to pay the entire compensation amount along with interest to the appellants/claimants in both the cases within six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.

¶64

v) The apportionment, deposit and disbursement of the enhanced compensation shall be made as per award of the Tribunal.

¶65

vi) The Registry to draw the modified award accordingly.

¶66

vii) Registry to transmit the records forthwith to the Tribunal.

¶67

Sd/(C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE

¶68

PMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26

P. Renuka W/O. Late P. Rudramuni v. Kodanda Rama @ Ramudu S/O. K. Ganganna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Renuka W/O. Late P. Rudramuni v. Kodanda Rama @ Ramudu S/O. K. Ganganna

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Kallppa Vs Shri. Ramachandra

Shri Ramanna Vs Shri Shivappa Revansiddappa Alias Siddappa Doddaningappgol

Smt. U. a. Sheela W/O Late Achyuth Rao Vs Vikas S/O Shridhar Navale

The Managing Director, Ksrtc, Vs Fakkirappa S/O Tirakappa

The Managing Director, Ksrtc, Vs Ramappa @ Ramanna S/O Channabasappa Havanur

Karnataka Neeravari Nigama Limited Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer