IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO M.F.A.No.2673/2019(MV) BETWEEN:
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, #144, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. REP. BY ITS ADM. OFFICER SMT.C.K PARIMALA. ..APPELLANT (BY SRI LAKSHMINARASAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI B C SEETHA RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE) AND:
1 . SMT. SWATHI A AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS W/O LATE PRADEEP, R/AT NO.696, 2ND CROSS, KAMATHGERI, MANDLA MOHALA, MYSORE-21.
2 . SRI.NAGARAJ AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O LATE THIMMEGOWDA, R/AT NO.154, AGASARAHALLI, KRISHNARAJAPET, MANDYA-571 426 3 . SMT.MANGALAMMA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS W/O NAGARAJU, R/AT NO.154, AGASARAHALLI, KRISHNARAJAPET, MANDYA-571 426 4 . SRI.PRAKASH S PATEL MAJOR IN AGE, S/O SHANKAR, NO.G-2, EMPIRE MAL, NEAR S.B.M. COLLEGE, M.G.ROAD, MANGALORE-575 003. ..RESPONDENTS THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.12.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.5732/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-11) AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.15,93,268/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALIZATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Appeal is directed against the Judgment and award dated 19.12.2018 passed in MVC No.5732/2017 by the I Additional Small Causes Judge and MACT, Bengaluru, wherein claim petition came to be allowed in part and an amount of Rs.15,93,268/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation came to be granted to the petitioners. Liability of the insured vehicle is saddled at 80%. National Insurance company Ltd., the respondent No.2 before the Tribunal has challenged the said Judgment and award.
2. In order to avoid confusion and overlapping, parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.
3. The brief facts leading to the incident are that on 13.08.2016 at about 11.00 a.m. one Pradeep and others were proceeding in a car bearing registration No.KA-04-MM-8102 returning from Madhurai Shanimahathma Temple towards Electronic City. When they reached near Manganahalli Bridge, Yeshwanthapura Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk, at that time a lorry bearing registration No.KA-06-A-8866 came from the hind side in a rash and negligent manner by overtaking a container lorry and dashed against the car bearing registration No.KA-04-MM- 8102 because of which Pradeep was seriously injured and was taken to hospital with other inmates who also suffered injuries all over the body. Pradeep succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. Petitioners stated that they have spent Rs.1,00,000/- for treatment and claimed that Pradeep was working as Supervisor with Narasegowda who is BDA Contractor and earning an income of Rs.20,000/- per month and Pradeep was hale and healthy at the time of accident.
4. The insurance company appeared through his Advocate and contested the matter and denied the allegations made by the petitioners and questioned the quantum of compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- claimed by petitioners.
5. Learned Judge after considering the materials and considering the income of the deceased Pradeep at Rs.8,000/- per month and future prospects at 40% and deducted 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses. Deceased Pradeep was aged 30 years at the time of death and multiplier considered is `17’. Loss of dependency is calculated by the learned Member as under:
Rs.8,000+future prospects 40% =3,200=11,200- 1/3 =3,733 = 7,467/-
Rs.7,467 x12x17 = 15,23,268/-
6. Learned Member considered negligence of respondents 1 and 2 in connection with their vehicle and apportioned the same at 20:80 respectively. It is against the said order the National Insurance Company Limited, respondent No.2 before the Tribunal has come in appeal.
7. Sri Lakshminarasappa, learned counsel for insurance company would submit that quantum is on the higher side and interest at the rate of 9% p.a. is exorbitant, and negligence not properly apportioned and it is considered on the higher side.
8. Learned counsel would further submit whenever accident happens where the victim’s vehicle dashes the lorry from the back side liability to pay compensation to be saddled at 50%. He would also submit that the driver of the offending vehicle was acquitted in the criminal case. In support of his contentions learned counsel relies on the decision in the case of Raj Rani and others Vs Oriental Insurance Company Limited and others reported in (2009) 13 SCC 654.
9. I find no materials are placed before the court to consider and uphold the contentions of learned counsel for insurance company and the deceased person was aged 30 years, a bread earner is lost by the family and liability to pay compensation of 80% of Rs.15,93,268/- together with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. is neither exorbitant nor disproportionate. There is no necessity for further proceedings in the case. Appeal is liable to be rejected at this stage itself.
Accordingly appeal is rejected.
Insurance company is directed to deposit the balance amount of compensation with interest at 9% p.a. within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Amount in deposit be transmitted to the Tribunal.
Sd/- JUDGE SBN