✦ Karnataka High Court · 28 Oct 2011

SMT. NACi\MMA W/0 I3 ASAVANAGOI DA PATIL v. J’)U.SEHOLD R/0 MURKJ BHAVL FQ. BAlI HONGAI

M.F.A Nos. 2-1-106 of 2010MANJULA CHELLUR23 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 99. In view of the above discussion and reasoning. M.F.A.No.24406/2010 is allowed In pan with costs. The enhanced compensation of Rs. 1.80.000/- shall carry Interest at (Pt p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Eight week’s time Is granted to deposit…

Judgment

Bv Sri. : J,;\X’\IA\ B \LV\\ODD.AIF AD\ I ANT) SIDANAGOUDA IRXNAGOT TD P VIII 0CC AGRfl Agc 28YF\RS R/O,MURKIBIIAV1 1Q BAILIIO1\GAI DIS’i’ BELGAUM SRLIRAPPA S/O.SLJRESII ELLAVI 0CC I3tJSINESS. Ar: 43 R/OJLNO.26l&, MALLI (3ALLI, BELGAU M, I’Q AND DISFJ3ELGAUM

3.

AFCONS INFRASIRUCIURF LID AIX ON [lOUSE NO.16 SHAN INDUS1IJAL ESTAIE X E ER D ESAI R( )AD AZA[) NAGAR P B NO 11 ANDI—IERI (WI 1ITf3BPJ MAELARASHTFL\ STAlL 53 I I \MBF I IUEi\’ \L INST Pj\( T IIJT NDIA MF)R( P NIl 4fl1 FL0R 4111 R KANAMI MAR. 3 \LLARD F I 1—JR [ Si-IANPBHAG HU1BERS KTPTi )SKAR E “AL) UELG U V 41 !l DIVISIONAL MAN -\ ‘R \ FL. MI. MEAl MAD NRASFJ I RI. BAILI-Io\GAI NO 129/200/ ON IHE FILE OF FlIP MO FOR ACCIDENI CLAIMS TRIBF NAL Al BAILHONGAL. AWARDING COMPENSATF iN oF RS. 1 .71 .400; WIFII iN HIRES I I F-IF. RAIE OP 0 )P PETI HON TILL FIlE HA IF OF ACIF IL 1)1 POIT P A P( iV Ti-IF DATE \ F IN MIA NO.20287/2010 BETWEEN: TIlE NATIONAL INSERANCE CO LIT). I ST FLOOR APMC YARD P B NO 24 SOUNDAITI FIIROUCH IIIF DIX ISIONAL MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD DIVISIONAL OFFICE. RAMI)EV GALLI BELGAIJM NOW REP BY ITS ASST. MANAGER V C SINGANNAVAR NATR)NAL INSURANC F (/O.LTD DIVISIONAL oF FICE RAMDF V CALLI BELGAT M iB Sri. LAXMAN B MANNODDAR. ADV AND KUMAF SIDDA HAS MK 110 1 )( N INCF MINOR L ID N RI HASANAIK 1IASAPP\ HONG IT R/() \i[RKJBIIAAI bAil IION(FC

3. -1. AFCON INFRASTRUCTURE Uli) A FCON HOUSE NO 16 SHAN INDUSTRIAL ESTATE VEER DESAI ROAD AZAD NAGAR PB NO 11978 ANDH FRI (W iITJMBAI MAHARASHTRA STATE 53 THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COLTD INDIA MERCHANTILE CHAMBERS 4TH FLOOR 14Th RKANAM1 MARC BELLARD ESTATE MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA STATE THROI- OH IFS DIX ISIONAL MV\JAGER SHANABHAG CHJMMBERS KIRLOSKAR ROAD. BELGAUM. (Br Sri.: B B ALASANDI. ADV FOR R2) SRLS.S.JOSHI, ADV FOR R4. SRLC.V.ANGADI, ADV FOR R3) .. RESPONDENTS MFA FILED U/S. 173(1) OF M.V.ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED:24-09-2009, PASSED IN M.V.C. NO. 325/2007 ON THE FILE OF TI-IF ]vIOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL. AT AWARDTNG COMPENSATION OF RS. 5,600/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9Or. PA FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF ACTUAL BAILHONGAL. BAILHONGAL MFA NO 20286 OF 2010 BE’IWEEN TUE NTfl N i OS RA\CL S 0 \PMC R( C ‘Z. L VIi 2 ) ND S 0- L( E? ‘N N’N N D1VISIONNI UI FICE hNA4DEV C \I ‘1 BELGA V NOW REP BY ITS ASST. MANAGER V C SIN GANNAVAR NAHONAL INSURANCE CO LIT) DIVISIONAL O” FICE RAMDEV GALLI., BELGAUM. SAKKARNA1K SAVALAGI IRANNA @ SHEKI IARAPPA Sb Awe: 1.8 YEARS 0CC STUDENT R/0 MURKIBHAVI TQ BAT LHONGAL DIST BELGAUM SHRI IRAPPA S/0 SURESH ULLAVI Age: 43 0CC BUSINESS R/O H NO 2618 MALI GALLI BELGAUM TQ & 1)1ST BELGAUM AFCON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD A FCON HOUSE NO 16 SHAN INDUSTRIAL ESTATE VEER DESAI ROAD AZAD NAGAR P B NO 11978 ANDHERI (W) MUMBAT 53 MAI{ARASHTRA STATE THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE C0LTD INDIA MERCHANTILE CHAMBERS 4TH FLOOR. 14TH KANAMI MARC BELLARD ESTATE MUMBA1 MAHARASHTRA STATE THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER SHANAB HAG CHAMBERS KIRLOSKAR ROAD. BELGAUM, 2

4.

(By Sri: S J(Hi AIDU FOR R4, c53\(\-y’ .ADV FOR T4)} 9 PER NNLM FRoM PHE DATE: OF FEll HON I1LL [‘HE DATE OF AC1’[ AL DEPOSIT. TN MFA NO 202R3 OF’ 201() HE RVEEN UhF NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LU) I SF FLOOR APM( YARI) P13 NO 24 SQL NDAFII I’EIROUGH THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER NXUONAL INSURANCE COLTD DIVISIONAL OFFI( F, RAMDEV GALl I BF I GAUM NOW REP BY ITS ASSL MANAGER V C’ SINGANNAVAR NATR)NAL INSURANCE CO.L1i) DI\ ISIONAL OF FlUE RAMDEV GALLI, BEI GM M. APPELLAN I’S (By Sri. LX’vLAN B MANNODD?R ADV AND I. SHRI BASANA1K BASAPPA CFIIATAGL’NDI Age: 53 YEARS 0CC AGR1CLI,TURE R/() MURKIBILA\ I ‘i’Q BAlI IIONGAL DIST BFLG UM OC( 81 SI ES R/O U C ‘,i1A,Y LCD’ STI{TAT -1 /1’ \‘EEP TE—A1 ROAD \ZAL \A( 1R Ph) ‘/) liP ‘L’\I).IIERi I’1 ‘LU 10 4 THE ORIENLAL INSt RANCE COJTD INDIA MERCHANTILE CHAMBERS 4TH FLOOR 14TH KANAMI MARO BELLARI) ES lATE MUMBAI MAHARASHTEA STATE THROI OH ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGFR SHANABHAG CHAMBERS KIRI 08K R RI) E3FdLGAt M RESPONDENTS (By Sit: HANAMANT R LAT(TR FOR RI. SrLBHARATESII ALASANDI, ADV FOR R2 SRLS S JOSH ADV FOR R4 SRLCN ANGADI, ADV FOR R3) MFA FILED U/S. 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACI 1988 AGAINST THF JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DArED: 2409 2009, PASSED IN MVC NO323/2007, ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT BAILHONGAL Al BAILHONGAL, AWARDING THE COMPENSAFION OF RS5,300/ WITH INTEI4ST AT THE RATE OF 9°o PER ANNUM FROM TIlE DALE OF PEtITION TILL THF DALE OF ACTI. Al DEPOSIT TRIBUNAl CLAIMS IN MFANQ3 OF 2010 BETWEEN TI) )PF (I THE NATEflNAI INST RAV’F O Tff 1ST Fl OOR APMC ARD I B NO 24 SOT M)Al I THROI OH LIlT DWIS1OrAI MANAC 1< R NATIONAL INSURAN( F CO )IVISIONAI RAMDE GAl 11 BLI CAT M O’A REPRISFN1FI II 115 551 MANAGE 54 SAl St TSIC A SAD 11AM S F M 11: AND SRLMUDDANAGOUDA BABAGODDA PX1]L AGE; 58 YRS, OCC:AGRL., R/O MURK1BHAVI ‘P:BAILAFiONGAL BELGA[JM SRI, IRAPPA 5/0 SURESH ULLAVI \CTL43RS O(( BLSINESS R/O H,NO. 2618 MALI GALLI, BELGAUM BELGAUM AFCONS INFRACUT[JRER LTD. \}CO’\ HNO 16 SH INDLSIRDLLSI\FF VEER DESAI ROAD, AZAD NAGAR PB.NOJ 1978, ADHERI (W) MUMBAI MAHARASTRA

4. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.ifl) INI)IAN MERCI-LANTILE CHAMBERS. 4TH FLOOR. ]4T RKANAMI MARC. BALLARAD ESTATE MUMBAI, BY ITS DIVT. MANAGER, SHANBHAG CHAMBERS KTRLOSKAR ROAD, BELGAUM BELGAUM. .. RESPONDENTS (By SrL: S S JOSHI, ADV FOR P4, P2 SD. SRI.C.V.ANGADI, ADV FOR R3) MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF THE M.VACT. AGAINST THE iUDCIEMENT AND AWARD DAFED: 2-U09-2009. PASSED IN MVC APPELLANT 12: IN MFA NO 20282 OF 2010 BETWEEN THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. I SI Pt OOR XPMC RI) P B \ 2 SF\F 1] EHROI. OH IHE DI\ ISbN \L MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE COJJFD DIViSIONAL OFFICF RAMDEY C \LLI BELGAI Yb NQ\\T REP BY ITS ASST. MAN?GER V C SINGANNAVAR NATIONAL INSURANCE COLTD DIVISIONAL OFFICE RAMADEV GALLI, BELGAUM, (By Sri. : LAXMAN B MANNODDAR. ADV) AND SHRI ISHWAR BASAPPA SAVALAGI ALe: 53 YEARS 0CC AGRICU1;I1JRE R/O MURKIBI-IAVI TQ BAILHONGAL DIST BELGAUM SHRI 1RAPPA 8/0 Si JRESH ULLAVI Age: 33 YEARS 0CC BUSINESS R/O H NO 2618 MALI GALLI BELGAUM TO & 01ST BELCIAUM AECON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD A FCON HOUSE NO 16 SHAN INDUSTRIAL ESTATE ‘ FE 3 L S P B Nt) 11978 TEDHERI IW MU MBAI - 53 MAHARASHTRA STATE. ) THE ORIENTAL 1NSURANC.E COIHI) MD 3 TMIZ \ 4. L.., \ 3t Nt 4.111 FLOOR I 311-i P KANIH1 I MARC

4. 13: BELLARD ESTATE MUMBAI MAHARASHTRA STATE FHROI Gil IFS DiV SIO\M MY\ \GER SHA’\ABH \( (H \MBLRS KIRI OSR\R RD RESPONDENTS (By Sri.: HANAMANT P LATSR, FOR RI. SRI BHRAILSH -L\S\DI AD’ FOR P2 SRIC. VANGADI, ADV FOR R3 SRLSS.JOSHI, ADV FOR R4) MFA PILED U/S.173(I1 OF TIlE MVACT. AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARE) DATED: 24-09-2009, PASSED IN MVC NO,3i9/2007, ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, ADDLMACT, BAILHONGAL, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS,4,900/- ALONG WITI I INTEREST AT TI I E RATE OP 9° PA. IN MFA NO 20280 OF 2010 BETWEEN THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. 1ST FLOOR, APMC YARD, II’BNO24, SOUNDATTI. IITEOT GH iF’S DIVISION/U MAN\oER \AFJONAI l\SLRV\Cl CO I ID DIVI’ION \L OF [iCE RAMDE\ C BELGAUM, NOW REP, BY ITS ASST. MANAGER VCSINGANNAVAR \ ATI fl\ ‘\L I SI PAN I F CO I’ I’D DIVISIONAL OFFICE, RAMDEV GALLI, BELGAUM BASANAIK 3/0 BASAPPA HONGAL YR’ OC( — T) ‘i ‘? J3ELGAI*J1\1 ‘PC \TF SER’ E ‘ ‘1 ,_ 11: . :

4. SRL1RAPPA S/0 SURESIl LLLA\i 43 YRS. OCC:BUSINESS R/O H.NO. 261 8, MALI GALL!. BELGAUM I3ELGALNI APCON INFRACRJRE LTD.. \I C ON H NO 16 SH \\ iM)[ SERIAL ESIAIL \ LLR DESAI ROAL) V D NAGAR P B NO 11978 ANDHFRI (NV) MLMBAU53 MAHARASTRA STATE THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMLTD INDIA MERCHANTILE CHAMBERS, 4Th FLOOR 14TH R R, KANAMI MARG. BALLARD ESTATE MtTMBAI MAHARASIL[RA SPATE THROUGH I ES DIN ISIONAL MANAGER SHANBHAG CHAMBERS KIRLOSKAR ROAD BELGAUM BELGAUM. RESPONDENTS (BvSri. HANAMANTRLAI1JR. ADV FOR Ri, SRI BHARFES1I B AL\SANDI ADX FOR R2 SRI.C.V.ANGAD1. !DV FOR R3, SRJ.S.SJQSH1, ADV FOR R4) MFA FiLED H/S 1 73(1) OF MVACT, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED: 24-09TI009, PASSED IN M,V,C. NO. 317/2007 ON THE FILE OF ThE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS AT AVARDING COMPENSATION OF RS. I, 17,/00[ WITH INTE.REST A.T THE RATE BAILHONGAL. BAILHONGAL IN IVEFA NO 20279 OF 2010 F OR UTIlE THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. 51 OI \I\PU ERRO1 Gil fliP 1T\ iSION \L NAN TI DIVISIENAL OFFICE. PTIMDEV (lALLi F 15: NOW R/B. ASST MANAGER \‘ C SINGANNAVAR NATIONAL INSURANCE ( 0 LII) DIVISIONAl OFFICE P \MDE\ GAl I I BELG L M BELGAUM. ... APPELLANT (By Sri. : LAX MAN B MAN NODDAR. ADV) AN L) 1, 3 4 RUDRANAIK 5/0 CIIANDRANAIK CHIViVIAGUNDI AGE 48 YRS OC( AGRL VEGITABLE \ LNDING R/O MURKIBHAVI, BAILAHONGAL’I’Q BELGAUM IRAPPA 5/0 SURESH ULLAAVI 43 YRS. OCC:BUSINESS R/O H.NO. 2618.

MALI GALLI, BELGAUM BELGAUM AFCON INFRASTRIJCTURE LTD AFCON H,NO. 16, SHAN INDUSTRIAL ESTATE VEER DESAI ROAD, AZAD NAGAR, P.B,NO, 11978, ANDHERI (W) MUMBAI MAHAR\STRA THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO,LTD T\I)IA MECI-iAM1I E C. HANIBERS 41111 LOOR 14TH R.KANAMI MARG, BALLARD ES’LI)’E. MUMBAI THROUGH ITS DIVI. MANAGER, SHANBHAG CHAMBERS, KIRLOSKAR ROAD BELGAUM, HARASIIFRASIUE (Liv Sri./Smt HANAMANT.RLATUR ADV FOR RI R2Si) SRI,CAIAXGM)I. ADV FOR 113. jS—’ 16 OF 9° RA. LROM 11 IF I)A I I OF PE 11 lION I ILL Ii IF [EVIL OF \( I1 AL DEPOSFI IN MFA NO 20205 OF 2010 BE RVEEN fl-IFN1VIR)NAL INSI pRANCE CC 1:11) 1ST FLOOR. Al’MC YARD. P.B.NO.24. SOIJNDXFII. THROUGH THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER. NATIONAl, INLRANCE CO.. LTD.. l)IVJSIONAL FFICE. RAMDEV GALLI. BELGAUM. NOW R/B. ASST MANAGER V.C. SINGANNAVAR . NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD DIVISIONAL OFFICE. RAMDEV GALLI. BELGAI ‘M BELGAU M. . APPEL LANT (By Sri ,.LAXMAN B MANNODDAR, ADV AND SIIRLBASANAGOIJDA SHIVANAGOF DA VNDAVINAIKAR \GE43 YRS. OCC:AGRICf LIURL R 0 MURKJBHAVI, BMI AJIONGAL FQ DISI I3ELGAUM IRYPPA S/C SURESH UI I IA 4 1 RS OC:BL SINF S II N5. 26 BF GAL )NINFRAS -I I FL Al II((NIINO 16 IAN NI \I-L\RAS I PA IHEORIE NEIl INfRN\ JM)L ML( I I UN lIFE (H \MI F I I 14J ji 5 INAlIT II PA F 11.1 /J 0 D o r J c 0 i 0 E r 2 0 5 H ? 0I 0 i ) C 0 Z 00r C o 1 - 4 i r c O ) ) C w 18:

3. KUMARSHRJDHAR Age: 13 YEARS 5/0 BASANAGOUDA PATI L 0CC S31JDEN’I’ KUMARI VTSHALA Age: 11 YEARS D/0 BASANAGOUDA PAUL 0CC STUDENT SINCE RESPONL)ENTS 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS REP BY N/M PETITIONER No W/O BASANAGOUDA PAUL 1 SMT NAGAMMA

7.

RUDRAGOUDA APPASAHEB PATIL Age: 68 YEARS C)CC AGRICULTURE R/O MURKHIBHAVI. TAL: BAILHONGAL DIST BELGAUM SMT, NEELAWWA, W/O RUDRAGOUDA PATIL, Age: 63 YEARS 0CC: HOUSE HOLD WORK. R/O. MURKHIBHAV1. TQ: BAILHONGAL. DIS’12 BELGAUM, SRI IRAPPA 5/0 SURESH ULLAV1 AGE:43 YEARS OCC:BUSINESS R/0 HNO,26i8, MALI GALLI BELGAUM TQ: AND DIST:.E.ELGAUM. .AFCON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD AI( (‘\ H1 SE \ SHX\ 1\DT ‘DIES ‘p.. S’ U ERDE,EC,G Z)NT( P B NO II MUMBAI 53 fJj3,3,f.ASHTR/. STATE ANDHERI (W) U THIS ORIEJIS1AL INSTiRMASE COLTD F’ 3, T ZE’ 1’ ArT 1Dr) ESTATE TTT1ZJ 19: MAI-IARASHTRA STATE IIIROLC1II IFS DI\ ISl()\ \1 MAZ\ \GER SFJA\ \bI I \,( C II AM! IF PS hJRI USE \R R() \I) BELGAUM. RESPONDENTS By Sri./Smt : HANLMANTI-I P LXFUR, ADV FOP RI TO 5. RB SD, SRi CVANGAD1, ADV FOR P7, SRI S.S.JOSHI, ADV FOR P8) MFA FILED U/S. 173(1) OF M.V.ACT. AGAINST ThE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DATED:2409-2009, PASSED IN M.V.C. NO. 315/2007 ON ThE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT AWARDING COMPENSATION OF PS. 580.000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A. FROM TIlE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF ACTUAL DEPOSIT. BAILHONGAL. BAILHONGAL THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DPY. THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT MFi\.No,24406/201O is filed by the appellants claim ant for enhancement of compensation ir. respect of Basavanagouda PaUl pertaining MV.C.No315/2OO7 on the file of MACT, F3aiihongai.

All other connected appeals are filed by th.e insurc.r of tempo ii X Deal ha’ i.NO.r\J-\-z/ ._‘-,- T ‘‘. I hir UOH’riflR fle t1aOthv ,‘ I’ I entire compensaxion as Ihe drUry’ of the 1-ipper o —‘ j_’ I I F1 20; the occurrence of the accident on 04.10.2006 and also on tile ground that the insured of the tempo ti-ax violated the terms of the policy by allowiniz 20 passengers to travel in the tempo whereas the iwrmll was only for 12 passengers 2 The brief facts that lead to the filing of the above appeals are as under: On 04. 10.2006 at 01.00 hours (mitt night 10 clock). according to the claimants. they were all inmates of the tempo trax bearing No.KA 22/2534 and ere proceeding to difletent places In the tempo trax. On 3 10.2006 the tempo left the origin and several persons were carried in the said tempo from place to place The detlnation ol the pc wisH It fit ‘IU (cr1 cirredn arAgadi he km I of hut i iral pohe static n n RB R ad.

It wa’. J’) in. k mid night on 04 i;.2iY)B An. nrdit1c ti. ‘ht emplauii’nt wilt r ttnipc, rc-achccl nzdrh P 1 C gl’ c C tl’t I’ IC 11 tua., I 3 21: persons and injuries to several others. (Jul of 20 passengeb. 2 were nthiors and 18 were adults. The tempo trax said to haw dashed against upper which was stationed by die side of the road facing towards Hubli According to 11w ulalmaiits. the tippei was stationed I here for repairs and it wa’. due to the sole negligence of the driver of the tempo, the accident occurred The fact remains the claim petitions were against the owner and insurer of both the vehicles. The Pribunal opmed that the accident was due to rash and negligent driving of the driver ot the tempo wax and therefore the insurer of the tempo trax was directed to indemnify the owner. The insui e f the tempo tnx was s iddled with the lhbility I piyment of rcmpensation in I a.es h rein highst comp n atlon arded i i i’ d ci niatter rompem;.tu)n haJ t.’ bi paid b_s 11w ‘ i’.nei ‘4 th.— r.Pip.. tr.ix. tcgri’ nd Thj. ‘Ix suU irILrneI1 an• .mard. I 1mm ‘U ‘s ‘so Il 3/? lick” IT ( lied it ( 22: the appeah. the Insurer of the tempo trax challenges the award on all grounds.

3. An ording to I he learned counsel for the insurer ol thc tempo trax. thc facts on n cord would speak for themselves how the accident has occurred unless the tipper was standing there without any caution by flashing parking lights the accident would not hai e occurred. In other words. the very tipper was without any parking lights. therefore the accident occurred and hence driver of flit tipper was also equally responsible for the occurrence of the accident 4 As agains thi’, the respondcnts ‘) intl ppeanng icr the ln%urei •)f thu tippci contends that tin coillelit’ “I Ic )mplal it w )tt r ‘cc ds nd ca I n hc iccidc it flsc.crrl. I f’th€tI i dhc t1 rc ir pornnn ni tlte •ifltt ‘ii the wdir side .4 iii’ ..•n1 Ic ii cBs itt it ‘ s tb In et I hi.. It iipn t’a’c Ic I ) I ;‘ ‘1 ‘23 therefore there was no negligence of any nature on tin part of the driver of the tipper He has also placed betore the court copies of the exhibits that came to he marked before the MAC’T and the erinfinal (‘ace recordc indicate complaint came to be lodged by one Rudranalk sb Shivanalk.

The contents of Ex.P.3 Indicate Rudranalk was also travelling in the said tempo trax at the time of accident. After occurrence of the accident, he was the one who went to the police station and lodged a complaint at about 6.30 a.m on 04.10.2006. Based on the said complaint, investigation was taken up and ultimatels chargesheel also caine to be ified against the driver nf the tempo trax after completion of the in estigation. The contents of complaint of Ex.P.3 indicates 4Iu’r ha’•ing i I coltec ‘ n he prcx(cde w rd Ilubli ir h PC c I hei e. Ioi ied again tic nt d tq r fl( ii •jI 1’ .‘ •tl • ,.; I ‘flr c .1 jt.1— —.fik t • 24 from causing injuries to others. The Motor Vehicle Inspecto?s Report which is at Fx p 5 indicates that the damage caused to the tipper are very negligent and the damage as on thc rear nght side comet of the tipper and all other parts were found in order. So far as the tempo trax, front wind screen glass, left side portion of the body and seats ere fully damaged and the things that had scattered there would indicate the force of Impact on the vehicle when the accident occurred the front portion of the tempo trax ha come into contact with the right rear portion of the tipper Of course nothmg is statc d about the parking hghts of the tippc r in the omplamt lodged by Mr Rudranaik Wc annot gathet uch nfoi mahor ithc r tmm maha ar f the spo or fr rn’ he Moto ehicle r t Ii .i d I- negligence on the part of the driver of the tipper. burden is on the insurer to establish how driver of tipper also contributed negligence for the occurrence of the ac i ident.

Such proof could be either from the cross examination of the witnesses examined by th claimants or by ocamining other independent witnesses. The best n idenc e in this case would be to examine the driver of the- tempo trax who could have stated what exactly was tht situation when accident occurred and why he could not a oid the ac cident If th tipper was stationed without an parkmg lights or any other caution as the u hick was under repair such matenal must come on record m order o saddk hi i’i,urer lx ipper 1 he hlbilit3 of pl3mcnt f )mleasat r Ndtrn ph d on recor1 d atn 1cr I C I :26. responsible for the accident as could be gathered from the material on record.

5.

1’hen coming to the other contention raised by the insurer that the permit ol tI-n ft mpo ti-ax was oni) to c arrt 12 passengers and therefore the owner has violated the terms of policy. As already stated, 2 out of 20 passengers were minors and naturally they had to be in the company of their guardians. Even otherwise. the liability against the insurcr of tempo wax is only in respect of 12 claims and not all the claims. Therefore. the Thbunal was justified In holding that the insurer of tempo trax was responsibk ft mdenmifv th nvner Whether thc oner kno ledu irn ei arrymp hat man) passenger u sti n of ie md thc ‘appellant ‘ii- ure nas 1iot let material on pe I ‘it flit Tnt reirire. it r, hot open to thr’m o sfl that the . .wnrr ‘a’- it%pr.nsihle for the ‘iolaiion ni trnns ot rr, nrr. Jt. Hrn’e lii’ ‘it ‘,ot liat)1t. r, ii irit in. i 1ihn 27:

6.

Then coming to the appeal of the claimants in M.F.A.No.24406/2010. the claimants in this case are wife and children of one Basavanagouda Pall apart from the pan ins of Basnkuaagouda Paul. F athc r of the deceased was aged about 67 years and his occupation is also shown as agriculture The claimants were not able to bring on record any specific material indicating the exact age of the deceased. Therefore. the Tribunal proceeded to compute compensation based on the age shown in the post mortem rcport of the deceased. As per the records at Murkibbavi village, the family of the deceased had 15 acres 26 guntas of land It is ilso suggested that one of tiit land bearing ‘3)No /2 t iidrn It mine f f th dece ist i In I n 5 imants, °ludh h renr (if tin •‘ec ea%t-d E” cil pbc intt RTC pi iiininL to tin - z-ds no 1in iiritii-tL k i’itiaowi’’’ ia.’:lp-i inc leA f’n be ) t iti t ii. J 28: already €7 years or so at die time of accident and none ol the children of ilie deceased were majors Some material caine to he placed on record to show that sugar cane worth Rs i55O9/ ame to be supplied to M.K.Hubli Suiar Factory. on I2.OS2OO. RTC extract of the lands and also SL\ receipts issued by MKHubli Suar Cane Factory, indicates deceased was ultivaring his lands by growing sugar cane and other crops.

The claimants have stated the annual income of the deceased from the lands was about 2 Iakbs apart from incnmc from milk vending. Except one document Iront MKHubli Suai Factory, no other doei iments are furtleomin to show whether he marketed the produ e irid h ii mu income on 3\ crage Ic cast d m IC rom tnes I mds i h pdst to hic i He as i ii adi t hi it no d(j H1flJj! () ,i15t3i iiae t1i SiflTh ii ti3 O1iflII Fr’’m th man :ial en i rit Ii )flIi ‘k- ih:tt inst ha i k d 01 e I md i d i r I n :29: If he was earning Rs.2 laths from agriculture apart from milk vending, he must have maintained bank accounts but none of those documents are before this court. If he was supplying sugar to any particular factory. he would have also maintained a supply book where details of supply Is entered. However, the fact remains there was 15 acres of land. If not entire land, at least some portion of the land must have been used for growing sugar cane and other lands must have been used for growing other crops.

To look after 15 acres of land apart from the capacity of securing the labour and other inputs for better cultivation of the lands, one should be able to administer the cultivation as well. It needs managerial capacity to supervise the labour in the land. It is nobody’s case that other family members are capable of discharging similar service to the family. In the absence of the deceased, we cannot conclude that there is deprivation of source of income because the family still holds the lands and by engaging a good manager or a supervisor one can look 4 :30: after the lands. This Involves spending money to engage such services. Even If a supervisor Is engaged, he may not do the qualitative service as that of the deceased who has bondage not only with the land but with the family. In that view of the matter, one has to assess the loss caused to the family on account of deprivation of supervisory senrice rendered by the deceased Basavanagouda Patil.

The Tribunal has taken Rs.4,000/- as earnings of the deceased without even reasoning how It has arrived at this Rs.4,000/-. It Is not the income of the deceased but one has to quantify the supervisory capacity which Is lost to the family of the deceased. Keeping in mind that 15 acres of land Is to be managed by the family with the assistance of supervisor and a labour, minimum they must be able to spend Rs.5,000/- per month for engaging services of a good supervisor. This Is the loss that Is caused to the family per month on average basis. Even if we deduct 1/4th from this, Rs.3,750/- would be loss of contribution of the deceased to the family per month. As he was aged -5 .31 about 35 years. multiplier would be 16 In view of tile law laid down in Sarla Verma\ case (2009 ACJ 1292). The loss of c’ontributioii to the family Lw the thceased has to be calculated as under 3750X12X167.20.000/-. This has to be the amount of loss of dependancy so far as the family Is concerned.

7. So far as oth r heads. the Tribunal has awarded Rs.10.000/- tinder each head i.e.. Rs.40.000/- and this court Is of the opinion, there is no need to disturb the saId quantum of R.s.40.000/ under other heads. in all, the appellants ‘ire cntitled for Rs.7 60.000/ as compensation. The enhanced compensation will cany Interest at 6°i p.a horn the date of elton till thc late of deposit 8 Thc it ii’ ontt- idcc thit nte c nt 41car(frc) Lw thi’ lrihuntl at 9’. p.a is exoibitant I hi I Ic I I c’ IC q u 1 ‘it ni all T)it’ ‘L 45C. ct; tì . tht aplWal% tilt ‘1 l; ib’- :nstirc’ e ..t t -e I i ‘c I .32. Interest awarded by the Tribunal has to be reduced to 6°o p.a. so far as the rate of interest awarded and sal hilled. So far as the l1abilIt aitainsi the owner. as the owner has not pi eferred any appeal. we are not Interfering with those orders of the Tribunal.

9.

In view of the above discussion and reasoning. M.F.A.No.24406/2010 is allowed In pan with costs. The enhanced compensation of Rs. 1.80.000/- shall carry Interest at (Pt p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Eight week’s time Is granted to deposit enhanced amount together with costs and interest from h daft of receipt of copi of the order \ll h apjxals filed l,v ti ( nsir r arc parl ailnuc (gardt rcdu inof ‘ie nteestfrom9 r.a p ent to the -ncd l’rthunat I b ) I c + 0 0 c j - 0 0C 0 ( f C1 I 0 C 00 C ) l

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Karnataka High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. M.F.A Nos. 2-1-106 of 2010). ← Search more judgments