Partly allowed

Adiveppagouda S/O. Doddabasapagouda v. Maruti Doni S/O. Lakshmappa

Karnataka HC1 Feb 2024MFA.CROB/100025/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeals by an insurer and cross-objections by two motor accident claimants seeking enhancement of tribunal awards. The court reassessed compensation using a notional monthly income of Rs.6,500/-, awarded Rs.2,13,720/- to the injured and Rs.3,35,000/- to the widow, rejected the insurer's licence-endorsement argument, and dismissed its appeals.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.2,13,720/- for the injured and Rs.3,35,000/- for the widow with 6% interest; insurer's appeals dismissed; four weeks given to deposit balance.

Adiveppagouda S/O. Doddabasapagouda Vs Maruti Doni… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA

¶7

MFA CROSS OBJ NO.100025 OF 2014 (MV-I)

¶8

C/W

¶9

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.24004 OF 2013,

¶10

MFA CROSS OBJ NO.100024 OF 2014, MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.24005 OF 2013,

¶11

IN MFA CROSS OBJ NO.100025 OF 2014

¶12

BETWEEN:

¶13

ADIVEPPAGOUDA S/O. DODDABASAPAGOUDA MUDIGOUDRA, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. MAKANUR, TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶14

…CROSS OBJECTOR

¶15

(BY SRI. G.S. HULAMANI, ADVOCATE)

¶16

Digitally
signed by
SAROJA
SAROJA HANGARAKI
HANGARAKI Date:
2024.02.19
15:57:45
+0530

¶17

AND:

¶18

MARUTI DONI S/O. LAKSHMAPPA AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. UKKADAGATRI, TQ: HARIHAR, DIST: DAVANGERE.

¶19

THE GENERAL MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., SUBRYAMANIYAM BUILDING, 2^ND FLOOR, NO.1 CLUB HOUSE ROAD, ANNA SALAIM, CHENNAI, STATE: TAMILNADU.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 DISPENSED WITH)

¶22

¶23

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶24

THIS MFA. CROB IN MFA No.24004/2013 IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2013 PASSED IN MVC No.567/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT, RANEBENNUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶25

IN M.F.A. NO.24004 OF 2013

¶26

BETWEEN:

¶27

THE GENERAL MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., SUBRYAMANIYAM BUILDING, 2^ND FLOOR, NO.1 CLUB HOUSE ROAD, ANNASALAIM, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU-600002.

¶28

…APPELLANT

¶29

(BY SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE)

¶30

AND:

¶31

SRI. ADIVEPPAGOUDA S/O. DODDABASAPAGOUDA MUDIGOUDRA, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. MAKANUR, TQ: RANNEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶32

SRI. MARUTI DONI S/O. LAKSHMAPPA AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF TATA ACE MAGIC NO.KA-17/B-4612, R/O. UKKADAGATRI, TAL: HARIHAR, DIST: DAVANGERE.

¶33

…RESPONDENTS

¶34

(BY SRI. G.S. HULAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 DISPENSED WITH)

¶35

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.567/2012

¶36

¶37

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶38

ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, RANNEBENNUR, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.1,18,320/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALISATION.

¶39

IN MFA CROSS OBJ NO.100024 OF 2014

¶40

BETWEEN:

¶41

GANGAMMA W/O. CHANNAPPA BANAKAR, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O. KARALAGERI (MAKANUR) TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.

¶42

…CROSS OBJECTOR

¶43

(BY SRI. G.S. HULAMANI, ADVOCATE)

¶44

AND:

¶45

MARUTI DONI S/O. LAKSHMAPPA AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. UKKADAGATRI, TQ: HARIHAR, DIST: DAVANGERE.

¶46

THE GENERAL MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., SUBRYAMANIYAM BUILDING, 2^ND FLOOR, NO.1 CLUB HOUSE ROAD, ANNA SALAIM, CHENNAI, STATE: TAMILNADU.

¶47

…RESPONDENTS

¶48

(BY SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 DISPENSED WITH)

¶49

THIS MFA. CROB IN MFA No.24005/2013 IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2013 PASSED IN MVC No.568/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT, RANEBENNUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶50

¶51

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶52

IN M.F.A. NO.24005 OF 2013

¶53

BETWEEN:

¶54

THE GENERAL MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., SUBRYAMANIYAM BUILDING, 2^ND FLOOR, NO.1 CLUB HOUSE ROAD, ANNASALAIM, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU-600002.

¶55

…APPELLANT

¶56

(BY SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE)

¶57

AND:

¶58

SMT. GANGAMMA W/O. CHANNAPPA BANAKAR, AGE: 60 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O. KARALAGERI (MAKANUR) VILLAGE, TQ: RANNEBENNUR.

¶59

SRI. MARUTI DONI S/O. LAKSHMAPPA AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF TATA ACE MAGIC NO.KA-17/B-4612, R/O. UKKADAGATRI, TAL: HARIHAR, DIST: DAVANGERE.

¶60

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.S. HULAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 DISPENSED WITH)

¶61

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.568/2012 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, RANNEBENNUR, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.2,23,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALISATION.

¶62

THESE MFA. CROB AND MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶63

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶64

JUDGMENT

¶65

These appeals and cross objections are arising out of the judgment and award passed in MVC No.567/2012 and 568/2012 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and AMACT, Ranebennur dated 30.08.2013.

¶66

Facts in brief which are utmost necessary for disposal of the appeals and cross objections are as under:

¶67

2.1 Adiveppagouda and Gangamma being wife of deceased Channappa being claimants in MVC No.567/2012 and 568/2012 respectively laid claim in respect of road traffic accident that occurred on 21.05.2012 at about 10 a.m. involving motorcycle bearing No.KA-27/H-5553 and Tata Ace bearing No.KA-17/B-4612.

¶68

2.2 In respect of the road traffic accident, a criminal complaint was filed and the same was investigated by investigation agency thoroughly and charge sheet came to be filed against the driver of Tata Ace vehicle.

¶69

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶70

2.3 Driver did not challenge the charge sheet and said

¶71

Tata Ace vehicle was insured with Royal Sundaram Insurance Company Ltd.

¶72

2.4 On contest claim petitions were allowed in a sum of Rs.1,18,320/- and 2,23,000/- in respect of claim in MVC No.567/2012 and 568/2012 respectively.

¶73

Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, insurance company and claimants have preferred the appeals and cross objections.

¶74

Sri.G.N.Raichur counsel for insurance company contended that fastening the liability on the insurance company is incorrect and sought for modification of the award.

¶75

Per contra, Sri.G.S.Hulumani contended that the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal is inadequate and sought for allowing the cross objections by granting appropriate compensation.

¶76

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶77

In view of the rival contentions of the parties, this

¶78

court has perused the material on record meticulously.

¶79

On such perusal of the material on record, accidental injuries sustained by the claimant Adiveppagouda and death of Channappa S/o Channabasappa Banakar stands establish by placing necessary evidence.

¶80

In the case on hand, accidental injuries by Adiveppagouda and death of Channappa in road traffic accident that occurred on 21.05.2012 involving aforesaid vehicles stands established by placing necessary oral and documentary evidence on record.

¶81

Admittedly, there is no proper proof of income furnished by the claimants.

¶82

Therefore, tribunal had to assess the income of the injured and the deceased notionally. For the accidental injuries/death for the year 2012, notional income is to be assessed in a sum of Rs.6500/- p.m.

¶83

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶84

Channappa was aged 70 years as per postmortem report. Therefore, there is no scope for addition of the amount as per the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in AIR 2017 SC 515.

¶85

Therefore, quantum of compensation needs to be reassessed by taking proper monthly income and also applying principles of law enunciated in the case of United

¶86

India Insurance Company Limited vs. Satinder Kaur alias Satwinder Kaur and Others reported in AIR 2020 SC 3076 and Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram and Others reported in 2018 ACJ 2782.

¶87

Insofar as claimant Gangamma is concerned, claimant is also entitled for the enhancement of compensation on the other heads.

¶88

Accordingly, quantum of compensation is reassessed as under:

¶89

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶90

Adiveppagouda (Injured)

¶91

Sl.No.	Name of heads	Amount(Rs.)
1	Pain and sufferings	40,000-00
2	Medical Expenses	20,000-00
3	Food, nourishment and	20,000-00
	attendant and conveyance
4	Towards loss of income during laid up period.	13,000-00
5	Towards permanent disability	90,720-00
6	Loss of amenities	30,000-00
	Total	2,13,720-00

¶92

Gangamma (Claimant/Wife of deceased Channappa)

¶93

Sl.No.	Name of heads	Amount(Rs.)
1	Loss of dependency	2,57,000-00
2	Loss of consortium	40,000-00
3	Medical expenses	8,000-00
4	Conventional Heads	30,000-00
	Total	3,35,000-00

¶94

Insofar as the argument of the insurance company that the driver did not possess the proper endorsement in

¶95

10 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶96

his driving license is concerned, the same is not permissible to be considered by this court in view of the authoritative principles of law enunciated in the case of Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Mukund Dewangan vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited reported in AIR

¶97

2017 SC 3668.

¶98

15. Accordingly the following:

¶99

ORDER

¶100

i) Appeals by the insurance company in

¶101

MFA No.24004/2013 and MFA No.24005/2013 are dismissed.

¶102

ii) Cross objections filed by the injured Adiveppagouda in MFA Crob No.100025/2014 and claimant Smt.Gangamma in MFA Crob. No.100024/2014 are allowed in part.

¶103

iii) As against sum of Rs.1,18,320/- granted by the tribunal, Sri. Adeiveppagouda is entitled

¶104

11 -

¶105

NC: 2024:KHC-D:2293 MFA.CROB No. 100025 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 24004 of 2013, MFA.CROB No.100024 of 2014, MFA No.24005 of 2013

¶106

for Rs. 2,13,720-00 along with interest at 6%

¶107

per annum from the date of petition, till realization.

¶108

iv) As against sum of Rs. 2,23,000/granted by the tribunal, claimant Smt.Gangamma is entitled for Rs. 3,35,000-00 along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition, till realization.

¶109

v) Four weeks time is granted to insurance

¶110

company to deposit the balance compensation.

¶111

Sd/JUDGE

¶112

HMB

¶113

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13

Adiveppagouda S/O. Doddabasapagouda v. Maruti Doni S/O. Lakshmappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adiveppagouda S/O. Doddabasapagouda v. Maruti Doni S/O. Lakshmappa

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. Siddalingappa Alias Babu S/O Mallikarju Asooti Vs Smt. Veda Alias Shweta W/O Siddalingappa Asooti

Holabasappa Yamanappa Goudar Vs Huchappa Appojappa Nayakar

The Divisional Manager Vs Paramesh S/O Antravalleppa Kurubar

Smt. Shantavva W/O. Basappa Kamatad Vs the Divisional Manager

Shri.Dhaku Mahadev Jadhav, Vs Shri.Indrakumar Parashuram Majukar

Gangamma W/O. Channappa Banakar Vs Maruti Doni S/O. Lakshmappa