Maruti Mahadev Bhatte, Vs Babar Kutubuddin Baig

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 05^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 20525 OF 2012 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 20641 OF 2012

¶6

IN MFA NO. 20525 OF 2012

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS SENIOR DIVISION MANAGER, MUDALAGI BUILDING, CLUB ROAD, BELGAUM, HERIN REPRED. BY NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFICE, MOTOR THIRD PARTY HUB OFFICE, SRINATH COMPLEX, 2^ND FLOOR, NEW COTTON MARKET HUBLI-580029, REPTD BY ITS ASST. MANAGER.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. RAVINDRA R. MANE, ADV)

¶11

AND:

¶12

MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR

¶13

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.09 12:07:43 +0530

¶14

SRI. MARUTI MAHADEV BHATTE AGE : 20 YEARS, OCC: CLEANER, R/O. KAKATI, TQ & DIST : BELGAUM.

¶15

SRI. BABAR KUTUBUDDIN BAIG, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. HIREKUDI, TQ: CHIKODI, DIST: BELGAUM. (OWNER OF GOODS TRUCK NO.KA-23/A-1095)

¶16

SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., D.O. AT CHIKODI, THROUGH BRANCH OFFICE, AT: OPPOSITE CIVIL HOSPITAL APMC ROAD, BELGAUM. (POLICY NO.10003/31/10/107738 VALID FROM 26.09.2009 TO 25.09.2010 INSURER OF GOODS TRUCK NO. KA-23/A-1095)

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

SRI. SUNIL CHANDRAKANT ERRAM AGE: MAJOR, OCC: TRANSPORT BUSINESS, R/O. FLAT NO. 4, POOJA APARTMENT, NEAR DOORDARSHAN KENDRA, KARAD, DIST: SATARA, STATE: MAHARASTRA. OWNER OF TRUCK NO.MH-11/M-6857)

¶21

SRI. SURESH S/O. BALAKRISHNA CHAVAN AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O. ALSUND, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST : SANGLI, STATE : MAHARASTRA. (DRIVER OF TRUCK NO.MH-11/M-6857)

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SRI. HARISH S MAIGUR, ADV FOR R1, SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADV FOR R2, SRI. NAGARAJ C. KOLLOORI, ADV FOR R3, NOTICE TO R4 & R5 ARE SERVED)

¶24

THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF THE M.V.ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DTD:22-11-2011, PASSED IN MVC NO.502/2010, ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER AND MEMBER, ADDL.MACT, BELGAUM, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.5,94,000/- ALONG WITH INTERST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALISATION.

¶25

IN MFA NO. 20641 OF 2012

¶26

BETWEEN:

¶27

SRI. MARUTI MAHADEV BHATTE, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: CLEANER (NOW NIL), R/O: KAKATI, TALUK & DIST: BELGAUM.

¶28

…APPELLANT

¶29

(BY SRI. HARISH S MAIGUR, ADV)

¶30

AND:

¶31

SHRI. BABAR KUTUBUDDIN BAIG, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: HIREKUDI, TALUK: CHIKODI, DIST: BELGAUM.

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., D.O AT CHIKODI THROUGH BRANCH OFFICE, OPPOSITE CIVIL HOSPITAL, APMC ROAD, BELGAUM.

¶35

SHRI. SUNIL CHANDRAKANT ERRAM, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: TRANSPORT BUSINESS, R/O: FLAT NO.4, POOJA APARTMENT, NEAR DOORDARSHAN KENDRA, KARAD, DIST. SATARA (MAHARASHTRA STATE).

¶36

THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., MUDALAGI BUILDING, CLUB ROAD, BELGAUM.

¶37

SHRI. SURESH BALKRISHNA CHAVAN, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, ALSAND, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: SANGLI (MAHARASHTRA).

¶38

…RESPONDENTS

¶39

(BY SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADV FOR R1, SRI. NAGARAJ C. KOLLORI, ADV FOR R2, SRI. RAVINDRA R. MANE, ADV FOR R4, NOTICE TO R3 & R5 ARE SERVED)

¶40

THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF THE M.V.ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DTD:22-11-2011, PASSED IN MVC NO.502/2010, ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER AND MEMBER, ADDL.MACT, BELGAUM, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.5,94,000/- ALONG WITH INTERST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALISATION.

¶41

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶42

4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)

¶45

Miscellaneous First Appeal No.20525/2012 is filed by

¶46

the insurance company and Miscellaneous First Appeal No.20641/2012 is filed by the claimant, challenging the judgment and award dated 22.11.2011 in MVC No.502/2010, passed by the Fast Track Court-I and Member Additional MACT, Belgaum (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’, for short).

¶47

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of these appeals are as follows:

¶48

The claimant met with an accident on 10.12.2009, while he was proceeding in a truck bearing registration No.KA-23/A-1095, from Chikodi, in the capacity of a cleaner under the employment of its owner i.e. Babar Kutubuddin Baig, Respondent No. 1. The driver of the truck stopped the said vehicle near the toll gate during night hours and another truck bearing registration No.MH-11/M-6857 came in a rash and negligent manner and collided with the lorry bearing

¶49

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

No.KA-23/A-1095. As a result the claimant has sustained grievous injuries and suffered permanent disability. Hence, prays to allow the claim petition.

¶52

Respondent No. 2 - the insurance company i.e. Shriram General Insurance Company, filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the driver of the truck bearing registration No.KA-23/A-1095 was not at all responsible for the accident. It is contended that, the driver of the said truck did not have a valid license. There is violation of the policy. There is no complaint and charge sheet filed against the driver of the vehicle bearing No. KA-23/A-1095. It is further contended that if at all the claimant wants to claim compensation on the ground of employer and employee, and then a petition has to file a petition before the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation. On these grounds, he prays to dismiss the claim petition against it.

¶53

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

Respondent No.4 also filed statement of

¶56

objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and prays to dismiss the claim petition.

¶57

Respondent no.1 – the owner of the truck bearing registration No.KA-23/A-1095 filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and it is contended that the vehicle is insured with respondent No.2 as of the date of the accident, covering the risk of the driver of the offending vehicle and he was holding a valid and effective driving license at the time of accident. Hence, prayed to dismiss the claim petition against respondent No.1.

¶58

The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed relevant issues.

¶59

The claimant to substantiate his case examined himself as PW.1, to prove the disability, examined the doctor as PW.2 and marked 12 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-12. In rebuttal, one of the officials of Respondent No.2 was

¶60

7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

examined as RW.1. The official of Respondent No.4 - the New India Assurance Company did not examine any witness. The official of Shriram General Insurance Company marked 5 documents as Ex.R-1 to R-5.

¶63

The Tribunal, after recording the evidence, allowed the claim petition in part with costs and directed Respondent no.4 - the New India Assurance Company and Respondent no.3 - the owner of the vehicle bearing registration No.MH-11/M-6857 to pay the compensation amount of Rs.5,94,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum and directed the New India Assurance Company Limited to deposit the same.

¶64

The New India Assurance Company Limited, aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in MVC No.502/2010, preferred an appeal in MFA No.20525/2012, challenging the impugned judgment and award, on the ground of liability, based on the point of contributory negligence. The claimant, being dissatisfied with the

¶65

8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, filed MFA No.20641/2012, seeking for an enhancement of compensation.

¶68

Heard the learned counsel for the New India Assurance Company Limited and the learned counsel for the claimant.

¶69

Learned counsel for the New India Assurance Company Limited submits that the truck bearing registration No.KA-23/A-1095 was parked on the middle of the road without indicating the parking lights or any signal. He submits that the accident occurred in the early morning at 3:00 am. There is a contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle bearing registration No. KA-23/A1095. He also submits that the Tribunal has ignored the admission of the claimant. In the light of the entire material on record, he submits that the driver of the truck bearing No.KA-23/A-1095 had parked in the middle of the road during night time which was the major cause for the alleged

¶70

9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶71

HC-KAR

¶72

accident. He also submits that the accident was caused due

¶73

to composite negligence on the part of the drivers of both trucks involved in the accident in equal proportion and thus, the Tribunal ought to have fastened the liability on both Insurance Companies. He also submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is exorbitant. He also submits that the disability assessed by the Tribunal is on the higher side. The Tribunal ought to have assessed the disability less than 25%. Hence, on these grounds, he prays

¶74

to allow the appeal filed by the insurance company and dismiss the appeal filed by the claimant.

¶75

Per contra, the learned counsel for the claimant submits that the FIR is filed against the driver of the truck bearing registration No. MH-11/M-6857. He submits that the Tribunal was justified in fastening the liability on the owner and insurer of the truck bearing registration No. MH-11/M6857. He also submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. He submits that the accident is of the year 2009, the Tribunal has taken the

¶76

10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶77

HC-KAR

¶78

notional income at Rs.3,000/- per month which is on the lower side. He also submits that the Tribunal has not added future prospects to the notional income. Hence, he submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under all heads be re-assessed to enhance the compensation. Hence,

¶79

he prays to dismiss the appeal filed by the insurance company and prays to allow the appeal filed by the claimant.

¶80

Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learn counsel for the insurance company and the claimant.

¶81

The point that arises for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation and liability.

¶82

REGARDING LIABILITY:

¶83

There is no dispute that the petitioner has met with an accident and sustained grievous injuries. To establish that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. The claimant produced the certified copy of the FIR, marked as EX.P-1,

¶84

11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶85

HC-KAR

¶86

which discloses that the FIR is filed against the driver of the offending vehicle bearing No.MH-11/M-6857, for the rash and negligent driving and causing an accident with the truck bearing registration No.KA-23/A-1095. Considering EX.P-1, the Tribunal has rightly recorded a finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. In view of the above discussion the point for consideration about the liability is answered accordingly.

¶87

REGARDING THE QUANTUM OF COMPENSATION:

¶88

It is the case of the claimant that he was working as a cleaner under Respondent No.1 and was earning Rs. 5,000/- per month. To prove his income, the claimant has not produced any records regarding his monthly income. In the absence of any credible proof of income, the notional income has to be taken into consideration as per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Thus, the Tribunal has erred in taking the income of the claimant at Rs.3,000/- per month. The accident

¶89

12 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶90

HC-KAR

¶91

occurred in 2009 and the notional income is to be assessed at ₹5,000/- per month, as per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority.

¶92

The claimant to prove the disability has examined the doctor as PW-2, who has issued a Disability Certificate, marked as Ex.P-10. Though Ex.P-10 discloses the disability of claimant to the different limbs, to the extent of 90%, it did not disclose the permanent physical disability to the whole body. The Tribunal has assessed the disability to an extent of 50% , which, in my view, is on the lower side. Therefore, this Court reassesses the disability at 60%.

¶93

As observed above, the notional income of the claimant is assessed by this court is at ₹5,000/- per month. As the accident occurred in 2009, and the claimant was aged about 27 years as on the date of the accident. Therefore, the future prospects of 40% (i.e., for the age group below 40 years) is to be added to the notional income, as per the proposition laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case

¶94

13 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶95

HC-KAR

¶96

of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi

¶97

reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 . Hence, the net income of the claimant will be Rs.7,000/- [i.e., Rs.5,000/- + 40% of Rs.5,000/-]. The multiplier applicable to the said age of the claimant is ‘ 17’ .

¶98

Considering the entire evidence on record, this

¶99

Court reassesses the compensation under the following

¶100

heads:

¶101

Sl.	Heads of compensation	Compensation awa	rded in Rs.
No.		By the Tribunal	By this Court
1	Pain and suffering	60,000/-	80,000/-
2	Medical expenses	1,50,000/-	1,50,000/-
3	Loss of future income (7,000 x 17x 12 x 60%)	3,06,000/-	8,56,800/-
4	Loss of income during laid up period (7,000 x 6)	18,000/-	42,000/-
5	Conveyance, attendant, nutritious food etc.	30,000/-	60,000/-
6	Loss of amenities	30,000/-	50,000/-
	Total :	5,94,000/-	12,38,800/-
	Compensatio	n enhanced by:	6,44,800/-

¶102

14 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11323 MFA No. 20525 of 2012 C/W MFA No. 20641 of 2012

¶103

HC-KAR

¶104

Thus, the claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs . 12,38,800/- as against the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.5,94,000/-.

¶105

Thus, the claimant is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs . 6,44,800/-.

¶106

In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order:

¶107

Order

¶108

i. MFA No.20525/2012 is dismissed.

¶109

ii. MFA No.20641/2012 is allowed.

¶110

iii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified.

¶111

iv. The petitioner is entitled for compensation of Rs . 6,44,800/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization of the amount.

¶112