Partly allowed

M/S Shriram Gic Ltd. v. Smt Yashoda Bai

Karnataka HC14 Mar 2024MFA/5572/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross-appeals against a motor accident award for injuries to an auto passenger. The court upheld insurer liability relying on Mukund Dewangan, raised notional income and disability-based heads of compensation, enhanced the award from Rs.2,86,445 to Rs.4,19,045 with interest, dismissed the insurer's appeal.

What did the court decide?

Claimant's appeal partly allowed: compensation enhanced from Rs.2,86,445/- to Rs.4,19,045/- (enhancement Rs.1,32,600/-) with 6% interest from date of petition till realization; insurer's appeal dismis

M/S Shriram Gic Ltd. Vs Smt Yashoda Bai — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5572 OF 2018

¶8

(MV-I) C/W

¶9

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4209 OF 2018 (MV-I)

¶10

IN MFA NO. 5572/2018

¶11

BETWEEN:

¶12

M/S SHRIRAM GIC LTD NO.S/5, 2ND FLOOR, MONARTH CHAMBER OPP.INFANTRY WEDDING HALL INFANTRY ROAD, BENGALURU-1

¶13

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

NOW REPTD BY THE REGIONAL MANAGER SHRIRAM GIC LTD NO.3/5, III FLOOR, S V ARCADE BILEKAHALLI MAIN ROAD OFF:B G ROAD, 2ND M B POST BENGALURU-560076

¶15

…APPELLANT

¶16

(BY SRI. A N KRISHNA SWAMY.,ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

SMT YASHODA BAI W/O UMESH RAO AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/A MAHARAJA KATTE KANAKAPURA TOWN & TQ

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶20

RAMANAGARA DIST PRESENTLY R/A C/O SAROJAMMA RAMAIAH BADAVANE, PILLAGANAHALLI JP NAGAR 9TH PHASE BENGALURU-79

¶21

SRI HUSSAIN M D S/O NAZEER MAJOR BOODIGERE VILLAGE, KANAKAPURA TQ RAMANAGARA DIST-571511

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. H.B.SOMAPUR.,ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2- SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶24

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED21.03.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.7412/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL SCJ & XIX ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU [SCCH-23] AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,86,445/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.

¶25

IN MFA. NO. 4209 / 2018 BETWEEN:

¶26

SMT. YASHODA BAI W/O UMESH RAO, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT MAHARAJA KATTE,KANAKAPURA TOWN, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DIST

¶27

PRESENTLY R/AT C/O SAROJAMMA RAMAIAH BADAVANE PILLGANAHALLI J.P.NAGAR, 9TH PHASE, BANGALORE - 79

¶28

…APPELLANT

¶29

(BY SRI. H B SOMPAPUR.,ADVOCATE)

¶30

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶31

AND:

¶32

M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD, BY ITS MANAGER ITS DEALING BANGALORE OFFICE, NO.S/5, 2ND FLOOR, MONARTH CHAMBER,OPP:INFANTRY WEDDING HALL, INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE1

¶33

SRI HUSSAIN.M.D. S/O NAZEER, MAJOR, BOODIGERE VILLAGE, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGAR - 571511

¶34

…RESPONDENTS

¶35

(BY SRI. A.N. KRISHNA SWAMY.,ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O DTD: 6.11.2023 NOTICE TO R2 D/W)

¶36

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED21/03/2018, PASSED IN MVC NO.7412/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XIX ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, (SCCH-23), BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶37

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶38

JUDGMENT

¶39

Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC.No.7412/2016 dated 21.03.2018 by the XXI

¶40

Additional Small Causes Judge & MACT (SCCH-23) at

¶41

Bengaluru both the insurance company and claimant are

¶42

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶43

before this court. The Insurance Company appeal is

¶44

MFA.No.5572/2018 and the claimants appeal is MFA.No.4209/2018.

¶45

The claim petition is filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant. It is the case of the claimant that on 18.10.2016 at about 4.30 p.m. the claimant was traveling in a Auto and the driver of the Tata Ace which is insured by the respondent/insurance company drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the Auto. As a result the Auto turtled. The claimant who was traveling in the Auto fell down and sustained fracture injuries. He was inpatient and spent huge amounts for treatment. As per the evidence of the doctor, he had sustained 40% disability to the lower limb and 20% to the whole body. Court below has taken 1/3^rd of 40% and taken the disability at 13%. When it comes to the income, according to the claimant she was working as agriculture coolie earning an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month. As

¶46

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶47

there was no evidence, the court below had taken the notional income at Rs.8,000/and granted the

¶48

compensation as per the table given below:

¶49

	Heads		Co	mpensation Awarded
1.	Pain and Sufferings	:	Rs.	40,000/-
2.	Medical Expenses	:	Rs.	14,245/-
3.	Loss of future income	:	Rs.	1,87,200/-
4.	Conveyance, nourishment and nutritious food	:	Rs.	20,000/-
5.	Future Medical expenses	:	Rs.	10,000/-
6.	Loss of amenities in life	:	Rs.	15,000/-
	TOTAL	:	Rs.	2,86,445/-

¶50

When it comes to the liability, it is the case of the insurance company that the driver of the offending vehicle was not having a valid driving license. It is their case that the driver is having a driving license to drive LMV (Non transport), but he is driving a "light motor vehicle" transport. The court below by applying the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Mukund Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.,¹ has held that the

¶51

1 AIR 2017 SCC 3668

¶52

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶53

Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation. Aggrieved there by the Insurance Company and the claimants are before this court.

¶54

Learned counsel for the Insurance Company

¶55

submits that the driver of the vehicle is having only a LMV (NT) but he is driving a transport vehicle, as such there is violation of terms and conditions of the policy and the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. It is submitted that even on the quantum also, the court below without any basis had granted the compensation, which is on the higher side and the same has to be reduced and in any event, the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation.

¶56

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for

¶57

the claimant submits that the claimant had sustained several injuries and he had to undergone operation. The court below had failed to grant compensation under the head of amenities. It is submitted that the under the head

¶58

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶59

of loss of income during the laid up period, no amount was granted. He was in hospital for 54 days, court below under the heads of transport, attendant and nourishment only granted an amount of Rs.20,000/- which is not a reasonable amount. He submits that as deposed by the doctor, the court below ought to have taken 20% as disability but unfortunately the court below had taken 13% as disability.

¶60

Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. In this case, the claimant had sustained one grievous injury under the head of pain and suffering the court below had granted an amount of Rs.40,000/- and no interference is called for. Coming to the loss of future income , according to the claimant, she is earning an amount of Rs.15,000/- and no evidence is placed on record, the court below had taken Rs.8,000/-. This court considering the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, as this is an accident of the year 2016, is taking Rs.9,500/- as income.

¶61

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶62

Then coming to the disability, according to the doctor there is 40% disability to the limb and the court had rightly taken as 13% to the whole body. Under the head of loss of future income , this court is granting an amount of Rs.2,22,300/- (Rs.9,500/- x 12 x 15 x 13/100). Towards medical expenses the court below had granted an amount of Rs.14,245/- which is a reasonable amount. Then coming to conveyance, transport and nourishment , he was in hospital for 54 days, hence this court is granting an amount of Rs.54,000/- . Towards future medical expenses , the court below had granted only an amount of Rs.10,000/-, this court is granting an amount of Rs.20,000/- . Towards loss of amenities , considering the disability of 13% this court is granting an amount of Rs.30,000/- . Then coming to loss of income during the laid up , no amounts were granted by the court below. Considering the income at Rs.9,500/- for three months this court is granting an amount of Rs.28,500/ -.

¶63

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶64

In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble

¶65

Supreme Court in the case of V.MEKALA vs. M.

¶66

MALATHI AND ANOTHER² , the claimant is entitled for an

¶67

amount of Rs.10,000/- towards Legal Expenses .

¶68

The claimant is therefore, entitled to the

¶69

compensation under the following heads:

¶70

	Heads		Co A	mpensation warded by Tribunal	Compensation Awarded by this Court
1.	Pain and Sufferings	:	Rs.	40,000/-	40,000/-
2.	Medical Expenses	:	Rs.	14,245/-	14,245/-
3.	Loss of future income	:	Rs.	1,87,200/-	2,22,300/-
4.	Conveyance, nourishment and nutritious food	:	Rs.	20,000/-	54,000/-
5.	Future Medical expenses	:	Rs.	10,000/-	20,000/-
6.	Loss of amenities	:	Rs.	15,000/-	30,000/-
7.	Loss of Income during laid up period	:	Rs.	00/-	28,500/-
8.	Legal Expenses	:	Rs.	00/-	10,000/-
	TOTAL	:	Rs.	2,86,445/-	4,19,045/-
	Enhancement	:	Rs.	1,32	,600/-

¶71

2 (2014) 11 SCC 178

¶72

10 - NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶73

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimant is

¶74

partly allowed , enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.2,86,445/- to Rs.4,19,045/- and the appeal of the Insurance company is dismissed .

¶75

ORDER

¶76

i) The appeal of the claimant i.e., MFA No.4209/2018 is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.2,86,445/to Rs.4,19,045/-. The enhanced amount is Rs.1,32,600/-.

¶77

ii) The appeal of the insurance company i.e., MFA.No.5572/2018 is dismissed.

¶78

iii) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

¶79

iv) Amount in deposit shall be forthwith transferred to the court below. On such deposit, the claimant is at liberty to withdraw the money.

¶80

v) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified

¶81

11 - NC: 2024:KHC:10592 MFA No. 5572 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 4209 of 2018

¶82

copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay.

¶83

vi) No costs.

¶84

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

¶85

closed.

¶86

SD/JUDGE

¶87

TS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18

M/S Shriram Gic Ltd. v. Smt Yashoda Bai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Shriram Gic Ltd. v. Smt Yashoda Bai

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

Sri Lathesh D Vs Smt B R Shewtha

Sri. Puttaswamy Vs Sri. Siddalingaiah

Smt Kruthi Krishna Vs Mr Keerthi Kumar S

Sri. N. Harish Vs Smt. L. Radha

M K Shanmukhappa Vs Nagaraja

Sunita Nehra Vs Rahesh Nehra