IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO M.F.A. NO.272 OF 2019 (MV–D) BETWEEN United India Insurance Co. Ltd., No.109, SSI Area, 5th Block, Raj Kumar Road, Rajajinagar, Bangalore – 560 010.
Represented by the Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd., Motor T.P. Department, Regional Office, Krishi Bhavan, 5th Floor, Nrupathunga Road, Bangalore – 560 001.
... Appellant (By Sri.A.N.Krishna Swamy, Advocate) AND 1. Smt.Sunanda @ Sunandamma, W/o late Shivalingaiah, Aged about 42 years, 2. Poornima, D/o late Shivalingaiah, Aged about 23 years, 3. Punitha S @ Punith S., S/o late Shivalingaiah, Aged about 21 years, All are R/at:
Near Water Tank, Sonnaredoddi Village, Gottigehalli Post, Harohalli Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara District – 562 112.
4. Nanjamma, W/o late Shivanna, Aged about 92 years, 5. Madaiah, S/o late Shivanna, Aged about 64 years, 6. Shivananjappa, S/o late Shivanna, Aged about 60 years, 7. Devaraju, S/o late Shivanna, Aged about 52 years, All are residing at Sonnaredoddi Village, Gottigehalli Post, Harohalli Hobli, Kanakapura Taluk, Ramanagara District – 562 112.
... Respondents This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award dated:11.09.2018, passed in MVC No.7665/2016, on the file of the XXI ACMM., & XXIII Additional Small Causes Judge, Bengaluru, (SCCH-25), awarding a compensation of Rs.11,10,100/- along with interest at the rate of 8% P.A., from the date of petition till the date of deposit of the award amount.
This MFA coming on for orders, this day, the Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT Though this appeal is listed for orders on I.A.1/2019 filed seeking stay and I.A.2/2019 filed for condonation of delay of 12 days in filing the appeal, in the nature and circumstances of the case, I.A.2/2019 is allowed. Delay of 12 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.
3. This appeal by the Insurance Company is directed against the judgment and award dated 11.09.2018 passed in MVC No.7665/2016 on the file of the XXI ACMM and XXIII Additional Small Causes Judge, Bengaluru (SCCH-25), wherein claim petition filed by the wife and children of the deceased came to be allowed in part and compensation of Rs.11,10,100/- together with interest at 8% per annum was granted with liberty to recover the same.
4. The incident that prompted for initiating the proceedings before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal is that, on 23.01.2016 at about 8.15 p.m., the deceased Shivalingaiah was traveling in trailer bearing registration No.KA-42-T-2261 that was attached to tractor engine bearing registration No. KA-42-T-2260. At that time, near the land of one Gundappa, Girigowdanadoddi, Uttarahalli Hobli, Bangalore South, the driver of the said tractor drove it in a rash and negligent manner to endanger human life and suddenly turned to his left. As a result, he lost control over the vehicle and the vehicle turtled down into a ditch and Shivalingaiah who was traveling in the trailer sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot.
5. The claim petition came to be preferred by his dependents consisting of wife and children who are three in number.
6. The learned Member of the MACT considered the claim petition and allowed it in part and granted compensation as stated above, and considered the parameters of notional income at Rs.8,000/- per month. It is stated that the deceased was aged 46 years.
7. Further, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company – the appellant, Sri. Krishna Swamy, would submit that the offending vehicle in the case is both tractor and trailer. Admittedly, only the tractor was insured and the trailer was carrying Shivalingaiah. Regard being had to the fact that it is not insured, learned counsel would stress on the defect of non- insuring of the trailer and submits, it amounts to violation of the terms of policy, and sought to exonerate the insurance company from liability to pay compensation and relied upon the decision of this Court in ILR 1995 Kar. 2157 in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs. Chandrashekar.
8. Further, it is necessary to state that the monthly income considered at Rs.8,000/- per month and non-granting of future prospects and considering that interest at 8% per annum was awarded, the relief is properly assessed and balance is maintained. I find, the quantum of compensation awarded is fair and just and it does not require interference.
9. I have perused the judgment and award passed in the claim petition. It is found, the learned Member has also referred the decisions rendered in ILR 2011 Kar. 4139 in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sri. Maruthi and others and AIR 2007 SC 1971 in the case of Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Brij Mohan and others, wherein though the compensation is ordered to be paid by the Insurance Company, it can be recovered from the owner of the offending vehicle. In the circumstances, I find, the first liability of compensation is on the Insurance Company. The appellant however is given option to recover the same from the owner of the tractor-trailer.
10. Thus, in the light of the application of the above legal procedure and the dictum laid down in AIR 2007 SC 1971, supra, the further proceedings are not necessary. The appeal is liable to be rejected at this stage. Accordingly, the appeal is rejected.
Amount in deposit be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith.
In view of disposal of the main matter, I.A.No. 1 of 2019 filed for stay does not survive for consideration. Consequently, it is rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE Mgn/-