Partly allowed

Sri Vinod Kumar J v. Sri Sriram Vedamurthy

Karnataka HC24 Sept 2024MFA/3421/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimant injured in a 2016 motorcycle-car collision sought enhancement of tribunal compensation. Court raised compensation to Rs.2,00,000 with 6% interest and held the Insurance Company liable to pay first, with recovery rights against the owner despite the driver's invalid licence.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs.2,00,000 at 6% p.a., payable by insurer with recovery liberty from owner; no interest on enhancement for delayed filing.

Sri Vinod Kumar J Vs Sri Sriram Vedamurthy — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:39522 MFA No. 3421 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3421 OF 2020 (MV)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI VINOD KUMAR J S/O JYOTHI K AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT NO.1, NAYANEES NILAYA CAUVERY ROAD, IST CROSS JAI HANUMAN NAGAR ARAKERE BTS LAYOUT BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE-560076

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. SURESHA M.,ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SRI SRIRAM VEDAMURTHY S/O G VEDAMURTHY FLAT C 1102, C BLOCK SMONDO 2.0, PATEL NEOTOWN ELECTRONIC CITY, IST PHASE BANGALORE-560099.

¶13

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD REGIONAL OFFICE T P HUB, NO.144, SUBBARAM COMPLEX M G ROAD, BANGALORE-560001.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.JANARDHAN REDDY.,ADVOCATE FOR R2: NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED: 24.09.2024)

¶15

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.04.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO. 664/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE V

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:39522 MFA No. 3421 of 2020

¶17

ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXIV A.C.M.M, MEMBER, M.A.C.T., MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been filed by the claimant challenging by the judgment dated 19.04.2018 passed by MACT, Bengaluru in MVC No.664/2017.

¶22

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 30.11.2016 when the claimant was riding motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-51-EP-4840 on Dollar Colony, Opposite to Sun motors, near Ruby junction, Bangalore, at that time, car bearing registration No.KA-02-ME-1557 being driven by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:39522 MFA No. 3421 of 2020

¶24

vehicle of the claimant. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.

¶25

The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act, seeking compensation. It was pleaded that he spent significant amount towards medical expenses, conveyance charges and other related costs. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred solely on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶26

Upon service of notice, the respondent No.2 appeared through counsel and filed written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. The respondent No.1, despite service of notice, did not appear before the Tribunal and was placed ex-parte.

¶27

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

¶28

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:39522 MFA No. 3421 of 2020

¶29

award has partly allowed the claim petition and held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.125,000/along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. and directed the owner of the offending vehicle to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.

¶30

The learned counsel for the claimant has raised the following contentions: QUANTUM OF COMPENSATION:

¶31

The claimant has sustained grievous injuries in the accident and he has undergone surgery. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 4 days. Even after discharge from the hospital, he was not in a position to discharge his regular work. He has suffered lot of pain during treatment. Considering the same, the overall compensation granted by the Tribunal is on the lower side.

¶32

LIABILITY:

¶33

The Tribunal has fastened the liability on the insuredowner of the offending vehicle on the ground that the

¶34

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:39522 MFA No. 3421 of 2020

¶35

driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid and effective driving licence as on the date of accident. However, since the claimant is a third party, in view of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of

¶36

PAPPU AND ORS. V. VINOD KUMAR LAMBA AND ANR.

¶37

[AIR 2018 SC 592] and in the case of NATIONAL

¶38

INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. SWARAN SINGH [(2004) 3

¶39

SCC 297] and in view of Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. BIJAPUR vs. YALLAVVA AND ANOTHER [ILR 2020

¶40

Kar.2239], even if the driver of the offending vehicle was not possessing valid driving licence as on the date of accident, the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation to the claimant at the first instance, with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle.

¶41

With the above contentions, the learned counsel sought to allow the appeal.

¶42

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:39522 MFA No. 3421 of 2020

¶43

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has raised the following countercontentions:

¶44

LIABILITY:

¶45

The claimant has sustained simple injuries and he has not examined the doctor regarding nature of injuries and disability suffered by him. Therefore, considering the nature of injuries and medical records, the Tribunal has granted just and reasonable compensation and it does not call for interference. Further, the interest awarded by the Tribunal at 9% p.a. on the compensation amount is on the higher side.

¶46

LIABILITY:

¶47

It is not in dispute that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid driving licence as on the date of the accident, which amounts to violation of the terms and conditions of the policy. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly exonerated the Insurance Company from liability and fastened liability on the owner of the offending vehicle.

¶48

¶49

NC: 2024:KHC:39522 MFA No. 3421 of 2020

¶50

With the above contentions, the learned counsel

¶51

sought to dismiss the appeal.

¶52

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

¶53

It is not in dispute that the claimant has sustained injuries in the road traffic accident occurred on 30.11.2016 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶54

QUANTUM OF COMPENSATION:

¶55

As per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained fracture of right tibia. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 4 days. He has not examined the doctor regarding nature of injuries and disability suffered by him. Therefore, considering the evidence of the claimant, nature of injuries mentioned in the wound certificate and medical records, I am inclined to award a compensation of

¶56

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:39522 MFA No. 3421 of 2020

¶57

Rs.2,00,000/- as against Rs.125,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶58

LIABILITY:

¶59

The Tribunal after considering the materials available on record has rightly given a finding that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having valid driving licence as on the date of the accident and has fastened the liability on the insured to pay compensation to the claimant. However, since the claimant is a third party, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PAPPU AND OTHERS (supra), and in the case of SWARAN SINGH (supra) and in view of Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of YALLAVVA AND ANOTHER (supra), the Insurance Company is liable to pay compensation to the claimants at the first instance, with liberty to the Insurance Company to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle.

¶60

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶61

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:39522 MFA No. 3421 of 2020

¶62

ORDER

¶63

a) The appeal is allowed in part .

¶64

b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified. c) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.200,000/-.

¶65

d) Following the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of ‘MS.JOYEETA BOSE’ (supra) , the enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6% p.a.

¶66

e) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.

¶67