Partly allowed

Mr Siddappa v. Mr Shaffi Hussain

Karnataka HC13 Mar 2024MFA/959/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimants sought enhancement of compensation for the death of a pedestrian hit by a motorcycle. The court enhanced income to Rs.7,000/month, recomputed heads including consortium per Supreme Court precedent, raising compensation from Rs.3,83,337 to Rs.4,84,957 with interest at 6% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.4,84,957 (from Rs.3,83,337) payable by insurer with 6% p.a. interest within four weeks; tribunal's other terms retained.

Mr Siddappa Vs Mr Shaffi Hussain — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:10449 MFA No. 959 of 2021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.959 OF 2021 (MV-D)

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

MR.SIDDAPPA S/O.LATE ERAPPA DEAD BY LRS.

¶7

MRS.JAYAMMA W/O.LATE SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS HOUSE WIFE

¶8

MASTER SHIVARAJ S/O.LATE SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS

¶9

Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

BOTH ARE R/AT UPPARA CAMP ASHOKA NAGARA BIRUR TOWN KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DIST-527 74

¶11

(BY SRI R.C.NAGARAJ, ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

MR.SHAFFI HUSSAIN S/O.HUSSAIN SAB AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/AT HALLIBYLU VILLAGE KELADI POST, SAGARA TALUK SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT

¶14

…APPELLANTS

¶15

THE NATIONAL INS. CO. LTD., 1^ST FLOOR, S.S.COMPLEX

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:10449 MFA No. 959 of 2021

¶18

B.H.ROAD SHIVAMOGGA

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI JANARDHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED V/O. DATED 31.01.2023)

¶21

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.01.2020 PASSED IN MVC.NO.78/2013 BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT KADUR AND TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR.

¶22

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

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

This appeal is preferred by the claimants challenging

¶25

the judgment and award dated 02.01.2020 passed in MVC.No.78/2013 by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kadur (for short ‘the tribunal’). This appeal is founded on the premise of inadequacy of compensation awarded by the tribunal.

¶26

Though this matter is listed for admission, with consent of learned counsels for parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

¶27

Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the tribunal.

¶28

¶29

NC: 2024:KHC:10449 MFA No. 959 of 2021

¶30

4. Brief facts of the case are as under:

¶31

On 22.08.2012, one Siddappa, a pedestrian was

¶32

going towards KEB situated on NH 206 of Birur town, at that time, a Bajaj Pulsar motor cycle bearing registration No.KA.15/R-5573 ridden by its rider came in a rash and negligent manner with high speed from Birur side and dashed against the said Siddappa, as a result of which, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries on the back side of head, right forehead, face, nose, right knee and other parties of the body. He was immediately shifted to Government General Hospital, Birur, where he has taken first aid treatment and thereafter, shifted to Mc.Gann Hospital, Shivamogga, then he was shifted to Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru and later, NIMHANS, Bengaluru, again to Sanjay Gandhi Institute of Trauma and Orthopaedic, Bengaluru, thereafter, he was taking follow up treatment at Government Hospital, Kadur. Despite best treatment in the several Hospitals mentioned hereabove, the said Siddappa could no recover from the treatment and

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:10449 MFA No. 959 of 2021

¶34

unfortunately, he succumbed to the injuries on

¶35

06.01.2014.

¶36

4.1 It is stated that the deceased Siddappa was doing coolie work and earning a sum of Rs.7,500/- per month. Due to the sudden and untimely death of deceased Siddappa, the claimants who are the wife and son of the deceased filed a claim petition seeking compensation.

¶37

4.2 On service of notice, respondent No.1 was placed ex parte . Respondent No.2 filed written statement denying the claim of the claimants including age, avocation, income and death resulting from the occurrence of accident and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.

¶38

4.3 On the basis of pleadings, the tribunal framed the relevant issues for consideration.

¶39

4.4 In order to substantiate the issues and to

¶40

establish the case, claimant No.1 got examined herself as PW.1 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to P71. On the

¶41

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:10449 MFA No. 959 of 2021

¶42

other hand, respondent No.2 got examined a witness as RW.1 and got marked documents as Exs.R1 to R12.

¶43

4.5 On the basis of material evidence, both oral and documentary and on hearing the submissions of learned counsels for both parties, the tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.3,83,337/- with interest @ 7% p.a. and directed respondent No.2-Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount within 30 days form the date of the order.

¶44

4.6 Being aggrieved by the meager compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimants are before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶45

Learned counsel for appellants-claimants submits that the tribunal has committed an error in awarding meager compensation, which calls for interference at the hands of this Court. Hence, he seeks to enhance the compensation.

¶46

Per contra , learned counsel for respondent No.2Insurance Company sustains the judgment and award of

¶47

¶48

NC: 2024:KHC:10449 MFA No. 959 of 2021

¶49

the tribunal and contends that the tribunal has rightly awarded just and reasonable compensation, which does not call for interference. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.

¶50

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants and learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company and perused the impugned judgment and award, Exs.P1 to P6 are the Police records, which depict registering of FIR and laying of charge sheet against the rider of the motor cycle, who was riding the vehicle rashly and negligently and responsible for the accident, which is not challenged or disputed by the rider of the motor cycle. Hence, the negligence is rightly attributed as against the driver of the offending vehicle. The claimants have also produced other documents as per Exs.P7 to P71 in support of their case.

¶51

Now coming to the age, avocation and income of

¶52

the deceased as on the date of occurrence of accident, it is seen that in several documents produced by the claimants

¶53

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:10449 MFA No. 959 of 2021

¶54

as exhibits, the age is different and no proper age proof has been produced by the claimants. Due to which, the tribunal, on the basis of Ex.P18, assessed the age of the deceased as 67 years and therefore, has applied the multiplier at '5', which does not call for interference and the same is retained. The tribunal has taken the income at Rs.6,000/-. However, the Legal Services Authority chart prescribes the notional income of Rs.7,000/- per month for the accident of the year 2012 and the same is taken in the present case. The tribunal has deducted 1/3^rd towards personal and living expenses, which does not call for interference and the same is retained. Therefore, in view of enhancement of income by this Court, the claimants would be entitled to the compensation of Rs.2,80,020/- (Rs.7,000/- - 1/3^rd = Rs.4,667/- x 12 x 5) towards loss of dependency as against Rs.2,40,000/- awarded by the tribunal.

¶55

The tribunal awarded Rs.7,937/- towards medical expenses, which is on the basis of actual bills produced by

¶56

¶57

NC: 2024:KHC:10449 MFA No. 959 of 2021

¶58

the claimants and the same does not call for interference and is retained.

¶59

The tribunal awarded Rs.20,000/- towards food, nourishment and attendant charges and Rs.20,000/towards conveyance charges, which do not call for interference and the same are retained.

¶60

The tribunal awarded Rs.10,400/- towards loss of income during laid up period. In view of this Court enhancing the income from Rs.6,000/- to Rs.7,000/-, the deceased was admitted as an inpatient in several Hospitals, this Court deems it appropriate to award compensation of Rs.28,000/- (Rs.7,000/- x 4) under this head.

¶61

The tribunal awarded Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium, which is on the lower side. However, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of

¶62

National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680, which has been subsequently followed

¶63

¶64

NC: 2024:KHC:10449 MFA No. 959 of 2021

¶65

by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Magma General Insurance Co.Ltd. vs. Nanu Ram and others, reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130 and United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Satinder Kaur Alias Satwinder Kaur reported in AIR 2020 SC 3076 each dependents would be entitled to Rs.40,000/-. Therefore, there being two dependents i.e. wife and a minor son, the claimants would be entitled to Rs.80,000/- (Rs.40,000/x 2) and 20% escalation for two block period on the same to be awarded under this head, which would come to

¶66

Rs.96,000/- (Rs.80,000/- + 20%).

¶67

The tribunal awarded Rs.25,000/- towards loss of love and affection. However, it requires to be adjusted towards loss of consortium and accordingly, it is adjusted.

¶68

The tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards transportation of dead body. However, in all, this Court deems it appropriate to award Rs.30,000/- under these heads and 10% escalation for one block period on the same to be

¶69

10 -

¶70

NC: 2024:KHC:10449 MFA No. 959 of 2021

¶71

awarded, which would come to Rs.33,000/- (Rs.30,000/-

¶72

10%).

¶73

In view of the above, the claimants would be

¶74

entitled to a total compensation of Rs.4,84,957/- as

¶75

against Rs.3,83,337/- as mentioned in the table below:

¶76

Heads	Amount in Rs.
Loss of dependency	2,80,020-00
Medical expenses	7,937-00
Food, nourishment and attendant charges	20,000-00
Conveyance charges	20,000-00
Loss of income during laid up period	28,000-00
Loss of consortium	96,000-00
Funeral expenses and	33,000-00
transportation of dead body TOTAL	4,84,957-00