Partly allowed

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited v. Ravi

Karnataka HC13 Nov 2024MFA/3682/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Motor accident appeals arising from injuries to three motorcycle riders in a collision with a canter lorry. The court held the insurer liable from the date it received the premium cheque, rejecting its plea that cover began later, held two pillion riders did not prove negligence, dismissed the insurer's appeals, and enhanced compensation to the injured claimants with 6% interest.

What did the court decide?

Insurer's appeals (MFA 3682/2022, 5586/2019, 5587/2019) dismissed; claimants' enhancement appeals (MFA 1904/2020, 1908/2020) partly allowed; compensation enhanced to Rs.13,70,113/- and Rs.2,18,200/- r

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited Vs Ravi — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3682 OF 2022

¶7

C/W

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5586 OF 2019, MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5587 OF 2019, MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1904 OF 2020, MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1908 OF 2020

¶9

(MV-I)

¶10

IN MFA No. 3682/2022:

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

¶13

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

6^TH FLOOR, GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING, 59^TH MAIN CROSS, RAJAJINAGARA,

¶15

2^ND BLOCK, BENGALURU-560 010, BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER.

¶16

(BY SRI. H.S.LINGARAJ., ADVOCATE)

¶17

…APPELLANT

¶18

AND:

¶19

RAVI

¶20

NOW AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, S/O. MANJEGOWDA, R/AT MUTTANAHALLI VILLAGE, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT.

¶21

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶22

A. B. SHIVAKUMAR NOW AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, S/O. BASAPPA, R/O. ARAHATHOLALU VILLAGE, BHADRAVATHI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH.R., PATEL., ADVOCATE FOR R-2; R-1 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶25

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.10.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 924/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MADDUR, MANDYA DISTRICT, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,39,963/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT WITH THE TRIBUNAL.

¶26

IN MFA NO. 5586/2019:

¶27

BETWEEN:

¶28

THE MANAGER CHOLAMANDLAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING 6TH FLOOR, NO.1/2, 59^TH MAIN CROSS, RAJAJINAGARA, 2^ND BLOCK, BENGALURU 560010 BY ITS MANAGER

¶29

...APPELLANT

¶30

(BY SRI. O MAHESH., ADVOCATE)

¶31

AND:

¶32

MANJAPPA R @ MANJUNATH S/O RAJAPPA R, AGE 28 YEARS., R/O KENCHANADODDI VILLAGE MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DIST-577501.

¶33

NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶34

¶35

A B SHIVAKUMAR

¶36

S/O BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/O ARAHATHOLALU VILLAGE, BHADRAVATHI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577201

¶37

...RESPONDENTS

¶38

(BY SRI. N.R.RANGEGOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI. CHANDRAKANTH.R. PATEL., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶39

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11/03/2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.923/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MALAVALLI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.11,17,500/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THE FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES OF RS.60,000/- SHALL NOT CARRY ANY INTEREST.

¶40

IN MFA NO. 5587/2019:

¶41

BETWEEN:

¶42

THE MANAGER

¶43

CHOLAMANDLAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING 6TH FLOOR, NO.1/2, 59^TH MAIN CROSS, RAJAJINAGAR 2^ND BLOCK BENGALURU-560010 BY ITS MANAGER

¶44

...APPELLANT

¶45

(BY SRI. O MAHESH.,ADVOCATE)

¶46

AND:

¶47

SHIVU @ SHIVARAJ AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS., MADDAPPA

¶48

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶49

R/O KENCHANADODDI VILLAGE MALAVALLI TALUK , MANDYA DIST.

¶50

PREMANENAT RESIDING AT KESHAVAPURA VILLAGE AMRUTHAPURA HOBLI, HOLALAKERE TALUK, CHITRA DURGA DISTRICT-577501.

¶51

A B SHIVAKUMAR

¶52

AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS S/O BASAPPA R/O ARAHATHOLALU VILLAGE, BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577201

¶53

...RESPONDENTS

¶54

(BY SRI. N.R.RANGEGOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; R-2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶55

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11/03/2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.925/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MALAVALLI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,64,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.

¶56

IN MFA NO. 1904/2020:

¶57

BETWEEN:

¶58

MANJAPPA R ALIAS MANJUNATH S/O RAJAPPA R NOW AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/O KENCHANADODDI VILLAGE MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT.

¶59

...APPELLANT

¶60

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶61

(BY SRI. N.R.RANGEGOWDA., ADVOCATE)

¶62

AND:

¶63

A B SHIVAKUMAR S/O BASAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/O ARAHATHOLALU VILLAGE BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577301.

¶64

THE MANAGER CHOLAMANDALAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING 6^TH FLOOR, NO.1/2, 59^TH MAIN CROSS RAJAJINAGARA, 2^ND BLOCK BANGALORE-560 010.

¶65

...RESPONDENTS

¶66

(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R. PATEL., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI. O.MAHESH., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶67

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.03.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.923/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MALAVALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶68

IN MFA NO. 1908/2020:

¶69

BETWEEN:

¶70

SHIVU ALIAS SHIVARAJ S/O MADAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/O KENCHANADODDI VILLAGE B G PURA HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571 401.

¶71

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶72

PERMANENT R/O KESHAVAPURA VILLAGE AMRUTHAPURA HOBLI HOLALAKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT

¶73

...APPELLANT

¶74

(BY SRI. N.R.RANGEGOWDA., ADVOCATE)

¶75

AND:

¶76

A B SHIVAKUMAR S/O BASAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/O ARAHATHOLALU VILLAGE BHADRAVATHI TALUK SHIVAMODDA DISTRICT-577 201.

¶77

THE MANAGER

¶78

CHOLAMANDALAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING 6^TH FLOOR, NO.1/2 59^TH MAIN CROSS RAJAJINAGARA, 2^ND BLOCK BANGALORE-560 010

¶79

...RESPONDENTS

¶80

(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R. PATEL., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI.O.MAHESH., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶81

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:11.03.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.925/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MALAVALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶82

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

¶83

¶84

NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶85

CORAM : HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

¶86

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶87

These appeals arise out of the awards passed by the

¶88

Tribunal, as detailed below:

¶89

Sl. No.	MFA No.	Appellant	Arising out of awards in MVC no.
1	3682 of 2022	Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited	Award dated 16.10.2021 passed in MVC No.924 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Maddur, Mandya District, awarding compensation of Rs.1,39,963/- toRavi.
2	1904 of 2020	ManjappaR alias Manjunath	Award dated 11.03.2019 passed in MVC No.923/2016 on the file
3	5586 of 2019	Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited	of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Malavalli, awarding compensation of Rs.11,17,500/-.
4	1908 of 2020	Shivualias Shivaraj	Award dated 11.03.2019 passed in MVC No.925/2016 on the file
5	5587 of 2019	Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited	of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Malavalli, awarding compensation of Rs.1,64,000/-.

¶90

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶91

BRIEF FACTS :

¶92

According to the claimants, on 14.01.2015 at about 12.30 p.m., an accident occurred between a motorbike and a canter lorry, and as a result of the collision, the rider as well as the pillion riders suffered injuries.

¶93

Manjappa the rider of the motor cycle filed MVC No.923 of 2016 while Shivu @ Shivaraju—the pillion rider filed MVC No.925 of 2016 before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Malavalli. The other pillion rider Ravi filed the claim petition in MVC No.924 of 2016 before the Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Maddur.

¶94

The Tribunal after assessing the evidence adduced before it has recorded a finding that the accident occurred on 14.01.2015, in which the claimants had suffered injuries and that they were entitled to a compensation of Rs.11,17,500/-, Rs.1,64,000/- and Rs.1,39,963/- along with interest at 9% per annum.

¶95

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶96

The Tribunal also recorded a finding that the insurer had in fact received the premium by way of a cheque on 14.01.2015 and therefore, it was liable to pay the compensation.

¶97

The insurer is therefore in appeal, basically, contending that the policy it had issued was valid only from 19.01.2015 and since the accident occurred on 14.01.2015, it did not have the liability to satisfy the compensation. It is argued that the proposal itself was submitted on 19.01.2015 and therefore, there was no question of the insurance company being liable. An argument is also advanced that the claimants were themselves negligent inasmuch as the motor-cycle in which they were riding had two pillion riders, which itself indicated that the negligence on their part.

¶98

The claimants are also in appeal seeking for enhancement. They also supported the judgment of the Tribunal and contend that the proposal as well as

¶99

10 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶100

the certificate of insurance itself records the fact that the premium was received on 14.01.2015 by means of a cheque and therefore, the risk continues from 14.01.2015 itself. It is their contention that the issuance of a policy subsequently could have no bearing on the liability and places reliance on the Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Smt.Edna Lemuel Maben¹ which has followed the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

¶101

of Dharam Chand² .

¶102

The certificate of insurance which is produced by the learned counsel for the insurer indicates that the receipt bearing No.1004128858 was issued on 14.01.2015 for having received a cheque for a sum of Rs.25,689/-. It is not in dispute that this cheque was submitted by the owner of the insured vehicle.

¶103

1 The Claim Manager, Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore vs. Smt.Edna Lemuel Maben, ILR 2020 Kar 22.

¶104

2 . Oriental Insurance Company limited vs. Dharam Chand, 2010 ACJ 2659: 2020 (2) SCC 68

¶105

11 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶106

However, the period of insurance mentioned in the certificate of insurance states that it was valid from 19.01.2015 00:01 hours till midnight on 18.01.2016.

¶107

As the accident has occurred on 14.01.2015, a question has arisen as to whether the risk would commence from 14.01.2015 or 19.01.2015.

¶108

10.Shri O.Mahesh and H.S.Lingaraju, learned counsel, contend that no matter when the premium was received, it is the date on which the contract of insurance comes into force which would be the relevant date and, in this case, the insurance policy was issued on 19.01.2015 and hence, the risk cover starts from that date.

¶109

11.It is also sought to be contended that as per Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (Manner of Receipt of Premium) Regulations,

¶110

2002 , the risk commences, according to Regulation

¶111

12 -

¶112

NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶113

(4)³ , only after the receipt of the premium. Since the premium was actually received on the date the cheque was encashed, the risk would only commence from that date.

¶114

12.A Division bench of this Court, by placing reliance on the judgement of the Apex Court in Dharam Chand, has stated as follows:

¶115

“16. ………….. Under such circumstance, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of DHARAM CHAND (Supra) has held that the insurance company cannot disown its liability, that, as and when the cheque or cash is received, the risk is deemed to have commenced from that time. ………”

¶116

13. In light of the said declaration of law by the Division

¶117

Bench, the insurance company cannot disown its

¶118

3 4. Commencement of Risk: In all cases of risks covered by the policies issued by an insurer, the attachment of risk to an insurer will be in consonance with the terms of Section 64VB of the Act and except in the cases where the premium has been paid in cash, in all other cases the insurer shall be on risk only after the receipt of the premium by the insurer .

¶119

Provided that in the case of a policy of general insurance that where the remittance made by the proposer or the policyholder is not realised by the insurer, the policy shall be treated as void abinitio.

¶120

Provided further that in the case of policy of life insurance, the continuance of the risk or otherwise shall depend on the terms and conditions of the policy already entered into.

¶121

NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶122

13 -

¶123

liability and its liability would commence from the time it receives the cheque or the cash.

¶124

14.The reliance placed on Regulation (4) would also not come to the aid of the insurer. Regulation (3)⁴ of the said Regulations, in fact, indicates the manner of premium payments and one of the accepted modes of payment of premium is by way of cheque under Regulation (3)(b). Regulation (4) indicates the commencement of risk and it says that the insurer should cover the risk after the receipt of premium by the insurer, except in cases where the premium has been received in cash.

¶125

4 3. Manner of premium payments: The premium to be paid by any person proposing to take an insurance policy (hereinafter referred to as the proposer) or by the policyholder to an insurer may be made in any one or more of the following manner(s), namely:- a) Cash;

¶126

b) Any recognized banking negotiable instrument such as cheques, including demand drafts, pay orders, banker's cheques drawn on any scheduled bank in India;

¶127

c) Postal money orders; d) Credit or Debit Cards held in his name;

¶128

e) Bank Guarantee or Cash Deposit; f) Internet; g) E-transfer;

¶129

h) Direct credits via standing instructions of proposer or the policyholder or the life insured through bank transfers; and

¶130

i) any other method of payment as may be approved by the Authority from time to time.

¶131

14 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶132

If the premium can be paid by way of cheque under Regulation (3)(b), it is obvious that the moment the cheque is received by the insurer, there is a receipt of the premium and Regulation (4) would come into operation.

¶133

16.If it was the intent of IRDAI that the commencement of risk would be on the encashment of the cheque, having regard to the language used in Regulation (3) regarding receipt of premium by way of cheque, Regulation (4) would have read that the risk would commence only from the date of encashment of the cheque.

¶134

17.Since Regulation (4) categorically states that on receipt of the premium , which can also be by means of acceptance of cheque, the risk would commence from the time the cheque was received by the insurer.

¶135

18.In this case, since the Receipt of the insurer indicated that it had received a cheque on 14.01.2015, it is

¶136

15 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶137

obvious that the risk would commence from 14.01.2015 itself which, incidentally, was the day on which the accident occurred. It cannot therefore be no doubt that the liability of the insurer would commence from the date on 14.01.2015.

¶138

19.It may also have to be stated here that if it was the case of the insurer that it had received the proposal and consequently, the cheque only on 19.01.2015, nothing prevented the insurer to examine the Intermediary who had issued the proposal and whose name is mentioned as ‘Purushotham’ with the Intermediary Code 54516 to establish the fact that the proposal itself was received after the occurrence of the accident. Further, in this proposal, the proposed period of insurance is clearly mentioned as 14.01.2015 to 13.01.2016.

¶139

20.The insurer could have also produced the receipt book of 14.01.2015 to indicate that it had not received the

¶140

16 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶141

cheque on 14.01.2015. On the other hand, an officer of the insurance company deposed that the vehicle was inspected on 19.01.2015 and thereafter, the certificate of insurance was issued. This was obviously a false statement simply because on 19.01.2015, the insured vehicle was in the custody of the police and actually was subjected to an inspection by the Inspector of motor vehicles. This false evidence given by the official would fundamentally indicate that the insurer was trying to cover up the issuance of the premium receipt on 14.01.2015.

¶142

21.As stated above, since the cheque was received under receipt dated 14.01.2015, the risk would commence from 14.01.2015 itself, insofar as the insurer was concerned and consequently, the insurer was rightly made liable to pay the compensation by the Tribunal.

¶143

22.The insurer also seeks to contend that the accident occurred solely due to the negligence of the rider of the

¶144

17 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶145

motorcycle inasmuch as he was carrying two pillion riders.

¶146

23.The Apex Court in Mohammed Siddique’s case⁵ has held that mere carrying of two pillion riders will not lead to an inference that there was negligence on the part of the rider of the motorcycle.

¶147

It will have to be stated here that in order to establish negligence, the evidence of the driver of the lorry was relied upon. On a reading of this evidence would indicate that apart from stating that the rider of the motor-cycle was driving at a higher speed, he has not even indicated that the rider lost control because he was carrying two pillion riders. In the absence of any assertion by the driver of the lorry that the motorcycle

¶148

5 Mohammed Siddique & anr. Vs. National insurance company ltd. & ors. AIR 2020 SC 520

¶149

“13. …... The fact that the deceased was riding on a motor cycle along with the driver and another, may not, by itself, without anything more, make him guilty of contributory negligence. At the most it would make him guilty of being a party to the violation of the law.”

¶150

18 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶151

rider lost control because he was carrying two pillion riders, negligence cannot be attributed to the rider of the motorcycle alone.

¶152

25.It may also be pertinent to state here that the police after investigation laid a charge-sheet against the driver of the lorry and this, by itself, indicates that there was an element of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the lorry.

¶153

26.Consequently, even on the ground of negligence also, the insurer’s contentions are rejected.

¶154

In the result, there is no merit in the appeals filed by the insurer and the appeals are therefore dismissed .

¶155

28.The amounts in deposit, if any, shall be transferred to the Tribunal for disbursal in terms of the award.

¶156

IN MFA No.1904 OF 2020 :

¶157

As far as the quantum of compensation in respect of injuries suffered by Manjappa—rider of the motor-cycle

¶158

19 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶159

is concerned, the Tribunal on assessment of the evidence has awarded a sum of Rs.11,17,500/- under the following heads:

¶160

Sl. No.	Nature of Heads	Compensation awarded by the Tribunal (In Rs.)
1.	Pain and sufferings	1,00,000/-
2.	Conveyance, food, nourishment, attendant charges	60,000/-
3.	Loss of future income due to disability	2,91,600/-
4.	Loss of income during the laid up period	90,000/-
5.	Medical expenses	4,45,793/-
6.	Loss of future amenities in life	70,000/-
7.	Future medical expenses	60,000/-
	Total :	11,17,393/-
	Rounded of to:	11,17,500/-

¶161

30.The Tribunal, on an analysis of the medical evidence, has concluded that the claimant has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 10% to the whole body.

¶162

31.The Doctor who was examined has stated that he had suffered disability to the extent of 68.5% in respect of the right femur. In my view, since the claimant had

¶163

20 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶164

suffered a fracture to femur with a degloving injury and also suffered a fracture of the right tibia, it would be appropriate to re-assess the whole body disability of the claimant at 20% .

¶165

As there is no proof of actual income earned by the claimant, the Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the claimant notionally at Rs.9,000/-.

¶166

In cases where there is no actual proof of income, the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority has also determined the income ₹9,000/- for the accidents of the year 2015 . Hence, it is held that the notional income determined by the Tribunal is just and proper.

¶167

Since the claimant has suffered 20% disability and he was aged 25 years as on the date of the accident, as per Pranay Sethi⁶ , future prospects of 40 % need to be added to the said income. ( Rs.9,000/- + Rs.3,600/- =

¶168

Rs.12,600/-) .

¶169

6 National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others - (2017) 16 SCC 680

¶170

21 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶171

35.Since the climate was aged 25 years as on the date of the accident, as per Sarla Verma⁷ , the appropriate multiplier of ‘ 18’ has to be applied.

¶172

36.Consequently, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.5,44,320/- towards loss of future earnings (Rs.12,600/- x 12 x 18 x 20%) .

¶173

37.The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.70,000/- towards loss of future amenities . Having regard to the percentage of disability sustained by the claimant, the said sums awarded by the Tribunal are just and appropriate and hence they are affirmed.

¶174

38.The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards attendant, nutrition, food, conveyance expenses; Rs.4,45,793/- towards medical expenses ; and Rs.60,000/- towards future medical

¶175

7 Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC 121

¶176

22 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶177

expenses and in my considered view, the said sums

¶178

are also just and proper. Hence, they are also stand affirmed.

¶179

A sum of Rs.90,000/- awarded towards loss of income during the period of treatment is justified since the claimant was hospitalised for more than four months and hence, this sum is also affirmed.

¶180

Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified and the claimant would be entitled to the following

¶181

compensation:

¶182

Sl. No.	Nature of Heads	As awarded by the Tribunal (In Rs.)	As awarded by this Court (In Rs.)
1.	Pain and sufferings	1,00,000/-	1,00,000/-
	Conveyance, food,	60,000/-	60,000/-
2.	nourishment, attendant charges
3.	Loss of future income due to disability	2,91,600/-	5,44,320/- (Rs.12,600/- x 12 x 18 x 20%).
4.	Loss of income during the laid up period	90,000/-	90,000/-
5.	Medical expenses	4,45,793/-	4,45,793/-
6.	Loss of future amenities	70,000/-	70,000/-
7.	Future medical expenses	60,000/-	60,000/-
	Total :	11,17,393/-	13,70,113/-
	Rounded of to:	11,17,500/-

¶183

23 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶184

41.Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total compensation of Rs.13,70,113/- as against Rs.11,70,500/-, along with interest at the rate of six per cent per annum (as against 9%) from the date of petition till its realization.

¶185

42.The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶186

43.The apportionment, deposit and release of the enhanced compensation amount shall be made as per the ratio adopted by the Tribunal.

¶187

44.The appeal is accordingly allowed in part .

¶188

In MFA No.1908 OF 2020 :

¶189

45.As far as the compensation awarded towards the injuries suffered by the pillion rider—Shivu is

¶190

24 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶191

concerned, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of

¶192

₹1,64,000/- under the following heads:

¶193

Sl. No.	Nature of Heads	Compensation awarded by the Tribunal (In Rs.)
1.	Pain and sufferings	25,000/-
2.	Conveyance, food, nourishment, attendant charges	20,000/-
3.	Loss of income during the laid up period	18,000/-
4.	Medical expenses	90,200/-
5.	Loss of future amenities in life	10,000/-
	Total :	1,63,200/-
	Rounded of to:	1,64,000/-

¶194

The Tribunal has come to the conclusion that claimant had suffered a cut lacerated wound over left chin and abrasion over face, a cut lacerated wound over left elbow and right calf region and moderate head injury. It has come to the conclusion that claimant has not suffered any permanent disability and hence, has awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering, and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of

¶195

amenities .

¶196

25 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶197

47.In my view, having regard the fact that the claimant was hospitalised for eight days and suffered lacerated wound and head injury, it would be appropriate to award a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, and Rs.40,000/- towards loss of

¶198

amenities.

¶199

48.A sum of Rs.20,000/- awarded towards attendant, charges, nutritional food and convenience charges and

¶200

Rs.18,000/- awarded ordered towards loss of income during the treatment period and Rs.90,200/- towards medical expenses are just and proper and hence, they are affirmed.

¶201

49.Consequently, the claimant would be entitled to the

¶202

following compensation:

¶203

Sl. No.	Nature of Heads	As awarded by the Tribunal (In Rs.)	As awarded by this Court (In Rs.)
1.	Pain and sufferings	25,000/-	50,000/-
2.	Conveyance, food, nourishment, attendant charges	20,000/-	20,000/-
3.	Loss of income during the laid up period	18,000/-	18,000/-

¶204

26 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶205

Sl. No.	Nature of Heads	As awarded by the Tribunal (In Rs.)	As awarded by this Court (In Rs.)
4.	Medical expenses	90,200/-	90,200/-
5.	Loss of future amenities	10,000/-	40,000/-
	Total :	1,63,200/-	2,18,200/-
	Rounded of to:	1,64,000/-

¶206

50.Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total compensation of Rs.2,18,200/- as against Rs.1,64,000/- along with interest at the rate of six per cent per annum (as against 9%) from the date of petition till its realization.

¶207

51.The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶208

52.The apportionment, deposit and release of the enhanced compensation amount shall be made as per the ratio adopted by the Tribunal.

¶209

53.The appeal is accordingly allowed in part .

¶210

27 - NC: 2024:KHC:46177 MFA No. 3682 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019 MFA No. 5587 of 2019 AND 2 OTHERS

¶211

Consequently, the appeals filed by the claimants in MFA Nos.1904 and 1908 of 2020 are partly allowed and the claimants would be entitled to the compensation along with 6% interest per annum, as against 9% awarded by the Tribunal.

¶212

55.The appeals filed by the insurer in MFA Nos.3682 of 2020, 5586 and 5587 of 2019 are dismissed .

¶213

56.The amounts in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursal in terms of the award.

¶214

Sd/(N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE

¶215

¶216

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited v. Ravi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cholamandalam Ms General Insurance Company Limited v. Ravi

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

The Branch Manager Vs Smt. Parvathamma

Prabhakar Reddy Vs the Manager

Karnataka State Road Vs Chikkalingamma

The Branch Manager Vs a Ajay

Sri. Narasappa Vs National Insurance Co. Ltd.

Smt. Nagamma Vs Machamada a Sathish