IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.9164 OF 2017 (MV-D) BETWEEN:
SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, E-8L, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA SITAPURA, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN- 302022.
NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.5/4, 3RD FLOOR, S.V. ARCADE BILAKAHALLI MAIN ROAD OFF BG ROAD IIM POST BENGALURU- 560 076. :APPELLANT (BY SRI H.N. KESHAVA PRASHANTH, ADV.) AND:
1. C. D. SHOBHHA W/O SHIVANNA NOW AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 2. C.S. GOUTHAM S/O SHIVANNA NOW AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS, MINOR BY N/F/ MOTHER C.D. SHOBHHA, 3. C.S. POOJA D/O SHIVANNA NOW AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS, MINOR BY N/F/MOTHER C.D. SHOBHHA, 4. GANGAMMA W/O SHIVANNA NOW AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, ALL ARE R/O CART STREET C .N. HALLY TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT -572222.
5. HANUMANTHAPPA T.H.
S/O LATE HANUMANTHAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS R/O KARIMARANAHALLY VILLAGE ARASIKERE TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT-573201. :RESPONDENTS THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 7/10/2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.1214/2015 BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AND XIX MACT, AT CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI, AWARDING COMPENSATION TO THE RESPONDENT Nos. 1 TO 4 HEREIN, IN A SUM OF Rs.17,35,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A.,BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, NARAYANA SWAMY J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the insurance company praying to set aside the Judgment and Award dated 07.10.2017 passed in MVC No.1214/2015 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC & XIX MACT, at Chikkanayakanahalli awarding a compensation of Rs.17,35,000/- to the claimants.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant – Insurance Company.
3. Learned counsel contended that the monthly income of the deceased taken at Rs.12,000/- is on the higher side. The claimants have not produced any proof with regard to income of the deceased. The quantum of compensation awarded is also on the higher side. Driver of the offending vehicle was not having proper driving licence. He has produced the driving licence with regard to transport vehicle but the vehicle in question is a non transport vehicle. Hence, liability could not have been fastened on the insurer of the offending vehicle i.e., the appellant herein.
4. In order to issue notice we have gone through the impugned Judgment and found that in respect of second ground taken, as per the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MUKUND DEWANGAN Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, AIR 2017 SC 3668, a driver possessing of light motor vehicle licence can drive all vehicles including transport vehicle of that unladen weight. Hence the grievance of the appellant with regard to driver holding a transport vehicle licence does not survive for consideration.
5. With regard to income, since the claimants did not produce any cogent evidence, based on the material available on record, rightly the Tribunal has assessed his income at Rs.12,000/- per month. The claimants have not preferred appeal otherwise they would have entitled for future prospects. But in either of the grounds, the insurance company cannot succeed. The appellant has not made any good ground to allow this appeal.
Hence, the appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission itself without issuing notice.
Amount deposited in this appeal be transferred to the Tribunal, forthwith.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE sac*