Sri. N. Shankar Vs M/S Nisaraga Leisure & Travels Pvt. Ltd.

M/S. NISARAGA LEISURE & TRAVELS PVT. LTD. NO.292/42, 4^TH FLOOR, 11^TH BLOCK, NAGARABHAVI, 2^ND STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 040. REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR SRI.HAGALDAL SHARANAPPA

¶15

(BY SRI. MALIPATIL P. S., ADVOCATE)

¶16

…APPELLANT

¶17

AND:

¶18

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, S.M.TOWERS, II FLOOR, 11^TH MAIN, III BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 070.

¶19

SRI. N. SHANKAR S/O. NARAYANAPPA,

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O AT YARTHIGANAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 110.

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. PRADEEP B.,ADVOCATE FOR R1;

¶26

SRI. R. CHANDRANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶27

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03/04/2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.114/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE V-ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,84,000/WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.

¶28

IN MFA NO. 5554/2019

¶29

BETWEEN:

¶30

SRI. N. SHANKAR S/O NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, RESIDING AT YARTHIGANAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.

¶31

...APPELLANT

¶32

(BY SRI. R. CHANDRANNA.,ADVOCATE)

¶33

AND:

¶34

M/S. NISARAGA LEISURE & TRAVELS PVT. LTD. BY ITS MANAGER

¶35

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

NO.1372, 4^TH MAIN, 4^TH CROSS CHANDRA LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 040.

¶38

M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BY ITS MANAGER REGIONAL OFFICE AT S. M. TOWERS, 2^ND FLOOR, 11^TH MAIN III BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BENGALURU.

¶39

...RESPONDENTS

¶40

(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2;

¶41

SMT. BHAVANA N. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ANAND KUMAR M., ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶42

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.04.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.114/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶43

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

¶44

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA

¶45

4 -

¶46

NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶49

Both these appeals are filed under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988¹ calling in question, the judgment and award dated 03.04.2019 passed in MVC No.114/2015 by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Devanahalli² .

¶50

The Tribunal, by its judgment and award dated 03.04.2019, partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a total compensation of `2,84,000/- together with interest at 6% per annum. The Tribunal recorded a finding that the driver of the insured vehicle did not hold a driving licence at the time of the accident and hence dismissed the claim petition against the insurer (respondent No.2 before the Tribunal) and directed the owner of the vehicle (respondent No.1 before the Tribunal) to pay the compensation awarded. Being aggrieved, the owner of the insured vehicle has preferred MFA No.5295/2019 and the claimant has preferred MFA No.5554/2019.

¶51

Along with the appeal, the owner has filed IA.No.1/2025 under Order XLI Rule 27 read with Section 151 of

¶52

1 hereinafter referred to as 'MV Act' for short

¶53

2 hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short

¶54

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908³ to permit him to furnish the documents along with the list which were, inter alia, copies of the licence of the driver of the vehicle.

¶57

Heard the submissions of the learned counsel Smt. Bhavana N.Patil for Sri. P.S.Malipatil, learned counsel for the owner, learned counsel Sri. R.Chandranna, for the claimant and learned counsel Sri. B.Pradeep for the insurer.

¶58

The learned counsel for the owner contends that the driver of the vehicle had a licence as on the date of the accident, to drive the insured vehicle. It is further contended that the documents produced along with IA.No.1/2025 clearly indicate the same. Hence, it is contended that the finding of the Tribunal exonerating the insurer from payment of compensation and fastening the liability solely on the owner is erroneous and it is required to be directed that the insurer is liable to pay the compensation awarded.

¶59

The learned counsel for the claimants supports the contention put forth by the owner with regard to liability and

¶60

3 hereinafter referred to as 'CPC' for short

¶61

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

also contends that the quantum of compensation awarded is on the lower side.

¶64

The learned counsel for the insurer justifies the

¶65

finding recorded by the Tribunal, both on liability as well as quantum of compensation.

¶66

The submissions of the learned counsels have been

¶67

considered and the material on record, including the records of the Tribunal, has been perused.

¶68

The questions that arise for consideration are:

¶69

i. Whether I.A.No.1/2025 filed in MFA No.5295/2019 is required to be allowed?

¶70

ii. Whether the finding of the Tribunal on liability is liable to be interfered with?

¶71

iii. Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is liable to be enhanced ?

¶72

Reg. question (i):-

¶73

In the affidavit filed in support of IA.No.1/2025 it is deposed by the managing partner of the owner that the driver of the insured vehicle had a valid driving licence at the time of the accident. It is forthcoming that along with IA.No.1/2025,

¶74

7 -

¶75

NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶76

HC-KAR

¶77

copy of the driving licence as also renewal made of the same, copy of the registration certificate of the insured vehicle as well as other documents have been produced. The question of liability having been urged in the present appeal, the documents produced along with IA.No.1/2025 are necessary for adjudication of the questions that arise for consideration in the present appeal. Hence, IA.No.1/2025 is allowed. The documents produced along with the application are taken on record. Accordingly, question (i) framed for consideration is answered in the affirmative .

¶78

Reg. question (ii):-

¶79

The Tribunal has noticed that the insurer has put forth a specific contention in the claim proceedings that the driver of the insured vehicle did not have a driving licence to drive the insured vehicle at the time of the accident. It is further noticed that the charge-sheet has been filed by the police authorities by including the relevant provisions of the M.V.Act on the ground that the driver of the insured car did not possess a valid and effective driving licence. The documents produced along with IA.No.1/2025 indicate that the driver of

¶80

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶81

HC-KAR

¶82

the car was authorized to drive the light motor vehicle⁴ from 10.07.1988 till 27.10.2014. The transport endorsement for the LMV was also issued on 25.05.2020. In view of the same, the driver of the insured vehicle was authorized to drive the insured car as on the date of the accident i.e., on 09.10.2014. In view of the same, the findings of the Tribunal that the driver of the insured car was driving the insured car without an effective driving licence and dismissal of the claim petition against the insurer is erroneous and liable to the interfered with. Hence, question (ii) framed for consideration is answered in the affirmative .

¶83

Reg. question (iii) :-

¶84

It is averred in the claim petition that the claimant is aged 30 years. The Tribunal has noticed the age of the claimant mentioned in the wound certificate (Ex.P3) as 29 years as on the date of the accident and applied the appropriate multiplier of ‘17’ which is just and proper.

¶85

It was averred in the claim petition that the claimant was an agriculturist earning `5,000/- per month. In

¶86

4 Hereinafter referred as to ‘LMV’

¶87

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶88

HC-KAR

¶89

the affidavit by way of examination-in-chief, the claimant (PW.1) has deposed at para No.8 that he was an agriculturist earning more than 5,000/- per month. The Tribunal has assessed the income of the claimant at 5,000/- per month.

¶90

Learned counsel for the claimant contends that the claimant, having deposed in his evidence that he earns more than `5,000/- per month, since no other documents have been produced to demonstrate his income, the notional income of the claimant is required to be assessed.

¶91

Learned counsel for the insurer vehemently opposing the said contention contends that the claimant himself having averred in the claim petition that the claimant is earning `5,000/- per month, the same has been taken by the Tribunal which is just and proper and not liable to interfered with.

¶92

It is forthcoming that, although, in the claim petition the claimant has averred that he was earning 5,000/per month, in the affidavit by way of examination-in-chief PW.1 has deposed that he was earning more than 5,000/- per month. Having regard to the fact that in claim proceedings, strict rules of pleadings are not to be construed and just

¶93

10 - NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶94

HC-KAR

¶95

compensation is to be assessed, it is just and proper that the notional income of the claimant be assessed. Accordingly, the notional income of the claimant is re-assessed as `8,500/- per month.

¶96

It is evident from the wound certificate (Ex.P3), discharge summary (Ex.P10) and other medical documents available on record that the claimant had sustained fracture of the right femur and fracture of the right foot. He also sustained laceration wounds and other simple injuries over the face and chin. The doctor (PW.2) has deposed regarding the injuries sustained, and assessed the whole body disability as 20.33%. The Tribunal has assessed the whole body disability as 20% which is just and proper. The claimant was treated as an inpatient for a total period of 27 days.

¶97

In view of the aforementioned, the compensation is re-assessed as follows:

¶98

i. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained, the compensation towards pain and suffering is re-assessed as 60,000/- as against 20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal;

¶99

11 - NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶100

HC-KAR

¶101

ii. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of 25,000/towards medical expenses. However, it is forthcoming from the medical bills and prescriptions produced as Ex.P12 that the total medical expenses incurred is sum of 26,215.63/-. Hence, it is just and proper that medical expenses be awarded in a sum of `27,000/-;

¶102

iii. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the period of treatment, the laid up period is assessed as three months and loss of income during laid up period is re-assessed as (8,500/- X 3)= 25,500/- as against 10,000/awarded by the Tribunal;

¶103

iv. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the period of treatment as an inpatient, the compensation towards food, nutrition, conveyance and attendant charges be re-assessed as 20,000/- as against 5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal;

¶104

v. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of amenities. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the resultant disability, it is just and

¶105

12 - NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶106

HC-KAR

¶107

proper that the compensation towards the same be assessed as

¶108

`25,000/-;

¶109

vi. Loss of future earning capacity / disability is re-assessed (8500 X 12 X 17 X 20%)= 3,46,800/- as against 2,04,000/- awarded by the Tribunal;

¶110

vii. The compensation of `20,000/- awarded by the

¶111

Tribunal towards loss of prospects in life is set aside.

¶112

In view of the aforementioned, the compensation is

¶113

re-assessed as follows:

¶114

Sl.No	Compensation Head	Amount Awarded by the Tribunal (`)	Amount awarded by this Court (`)
1	Pain and suffering	20000.00	60000.00
2	Medical expenses	25000.00	27000.00
3	Loss of earning during treatment period	10000.00	25500.00
4	Diet, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges	5000.00	20000.00
5	Loss of prospects in life	20000.00	00.00
6	Loss of future income	204000.00	346800.00
7	Loss of amenities	00.00	25000.00
	Total	284000.00	504300.00

¶115

13 - NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶116

HC-KAR

¶117

Accordingly, question (iii) framed for consideration is answered in the affirmative . Accordingly, the claimant is entitled to an enhanced compensation of (5,04,300/- - 2,84,000/-)= `2,20,300/-.

¶118

Although, it is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the insurer that the interest for compensation be saddled on the owner of the vehicle, since the driving licence has not been furnished by the owner before the Tribunal despite having been notified of the claim proceedings, since the policy of insurance having been taken by the owner in respect of the insured vehicle, the said contention is liable to be rejected and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at the rate of 6% per annum is just and proper.

¶119

In view of the aforementioned, the following:

¶120

ORDER

¶121

i) Both the appeals are allowed in part;

¶122

ii) The judgment and award dated 03.04.2019 passed in MVC No.114/2015 by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Devanahalli, is hereby

¶123

14 -

¶124

NC: 2025:KHC:28243 MFA No. 5295 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 5554 of 2019

¶125

HC-KAR

¶126

modified to the extent stated herein. In all other respects, the judgment and award of the Tribunal remains unaltered;

¶127

iii) The claimant is entitled to an enhanced compensation of `2,20,300/- together with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till its realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal;

¶128

iv) The insurer (Respondent No.2 before the Tribunal) shall be liable to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal as well as has been enhanced by this Court together with accrued interest within a period of six weeks;

¶129