- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1934-DB MFA No. 105420 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.105420 OF 2023 (MV) BETWEEN: THE CLAIMS MANAGER, CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., 1ST FLOOR, V.A. KALABURGI SQUARE, DESAI CROSS, DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580020, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SUBHASH J. BADDI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. GANGAVVA W/O NINGAPPA DOLLIN AGE. 36 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, 2. SUNIL S/O NINGAPPA DOLLIN AGE. 18 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, 3. ANIL S/O NINGAPPA DOLLIN AGE. 16 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, RESPONDENT NO.3 IS MINOR, R/BY HIS M/G. MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1, SMT. GANGAVVA W/O. NINGAPPA DOLLIN Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1934-DB MFA No. 105420 of 2023 4. FAKKIRAPPA S/O MUDIMALLAPPA DOLLIN AGE. 69 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, ALL R/O YALLAPUR HONNATTI, (Y.T. HONNATTI) TQ. RANEBENNUR, DIST. HAVERI-581115. 5. NINGAPPA S/O GURUSHANTAPPA THALAWAR AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O NEAR GOVT. HOSPITAL, BUDHIHAL, POST. KONCHIGERI, TQ. SHIRAHATTI, DIST. GADAG-582112. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANKIT DESAI, ADVOCATE FOR R1,R2 & R4; R3 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY R1; NOTICE TO R5 IS SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 24.07.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.1300/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT, RANEBENNUR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.23,54,312/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1934-DB MFA No. 105420 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) This appeal is by an Insurer, and the Insurer has called in question the judgment and award dated 24.07.2023 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Additional M.A.C.T., Ranebennur [for short, ‘the Tribunal’]. The Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.23,54,312/- under the following heads to the respondents – Claimants, who are the wife, the minor children and the aged father of the deceased Ningappa Dollin. 1. Loss of dependency Rs.22,44,312/- 2. Towards loss of estate Rs.15,000/- 3. Towards Loss of consortium : Rs.40,000/- 4. Towards love and affection Rs.40,000/- 5. Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses Rs.15,000/- Total- Rs.23,54,312/- 2. Sri. Ningappa Dollin has met with an accident on 16.09.2021 while he was travelling as a passenger in an autorickshaw bearing registration No.KA- 26/B-0909, which is insured with the Insurer. The accident - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1934-DB MFA No. 105420 of 2023 is within the limits of Vadavi Hosur village and when he was travelling for his personal work. The accident and the negligence of the driver of the autorickshaw are not in dispute, and the relationship inter se the claimants and the deceased is also not in dispute. This Court must also observe that the dependency of the wife and children on the deceased is not disputed. 3. Sri. Subhas J. Baddi, the learned counsel for the Insurer and Sri. Ankit Desai, the learned counsel for the Claimants, are categorical that the questions for consideration in the present appeal are: [i] Whether the Insurer must be absolved of the liability to pay compensation, and if cannot be absolved, whether there must be a direction to pay compensation and recover the same from the owner [the fifth respondent], and [ii] Whether this Court must interfere with the quantum of compensation as awarded by the Tribunal. 4. Sri. Subhas J. Baddi canvasses that the Insurer is entitled to avoid its liability to pay compensation, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1934-DB MFA No. 105420 of 2023 even the liability to pay and recover, because the unimpeachable evidence on record is that [i] the accident is within the limits of Vadavi Hosur village when the permit issued for the autorickshaw is for the Konchikeri village limits, [ii] the place of accident is at a distance of 30 kms. from the limits of Konchikeri village, [iii] the driver of the autorickshaw did hold a licence for driving light motor vehicle but did not have a specific endorsement to drive a light motor passenger vehicle. 5. This Court must, on perusal of records more specifically the evidence of the owner on both the nature of the licence held by the driver and the permit limits, the Insurer is able to establish breach of the terms of the insurance policy. However, what remains salient is that the deceased, a passenger in an autorickshaw, will be a third party and hence the Insurer can only mitigate its liability by recovering the compensation payable. The first question for consideration is answered accordingly. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1934-DB MFA No. 105420 of 2023 6. On quantum of compensation, Sri. Subhas J. Baddi submits that the Insurer’s grievance is with the Tribunal awarding 9% as interest and not 6% as must generally be awarded. The learned counsel also submits that the Insurer’s grievance on the grant of interest may be considered in the light of the fact that a sum of Rs.40,000/- is awarded both towards ‘loss of consortium’ and ‘loss of love and affection’. Sri. Subhas J. Baddi also proposes to contend that the compensation awarded towards loss of dependency will be on the higher side because the deduction towards personal expenses is at 1/4th of the income when it should be 1/3rd, as father cannot be a dependent on the deceased as the father continues to have interest in the agricultural lands owned by him and the deceased. 7. Sri. Ankit Desai on the other hand submits that this Court may consider the fact that the first Claimant [the wife is a young widow] who will have to shoulder the responsibilities of looking after two adolescences without any assistance of the deceased and an aged father-in-law on deciding whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1934-DB MFA No. 105420 of 2023 must be reduced on any of the grounds as canvassed by Sri. Subhash J. Baddi. 8. This Court must observe that the fourth Claimant, the deceased’s father, was aged 67 years as of the date of the accident. It is difficult to hold on the scale of probability, especially when there is no contra evidence, that a 67-years-old person will be completely independent of his son only because he continues to have a share in the agricultural lands. Further, it is settled that where the deceased has left behind many dependents, including minor children, the Courts can grant Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium to each of the dependent / minor children, as it is settled that the Courts under special circumstances could award a higher rate of interest. 9. If the appellants are entitled for a higher amount towards loss of consortium but are not granted and if that is offset granting higher percentage of interest which does not result in a bonanza but only in a grant of just and reasonable compensation, as is in the present - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1934-DB MFA No. 105420 of 2023 circumstances, this Court is not persuaded to interfere. In the light of the afore, the second question is answered accordingly. Consequentially the appeal stands disposed of with the following directions: - [a] The amount in deposit is directed to be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement subject to the Tribunal’s order on apportionment and deposit. [b] The Insurer – appellant will be at liberty to recover the amount paid in satisfaction of the award from the fifth respondent in executing this award. [c] The Insurer shall deposit the remaining compensation amount along with interest with the Tribunal within eight [8] weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE RSH, CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 2