Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1231 (KAR)

Gopal v. Bajaj Allianz Gen. Insurance Co. Ltd.

2022-09-16

N.S.SANJAY GOWDA

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. The claimants are in appeal challenging the award of the Tribunal, by which, the Tribunal, while awarding a sum of Rs.4, 500.00, has, however, proceeded to exonerate the Insurer of liability on the ground that the deceased was travelling in a goods autorickshaw and the Insurer would, therefore, not be liable to satisfy the compensation. 2. It is not in dispute that the 'B' register extract which was produced by the Insurer themselves as Ex.R1 clearly indicated that the carrying capacity of the goods autorickshaw was two. 3. In the light of the fact that it was also not in dispute that the deceased was an authorised representative travelling in the vehicle along with goods, the liability of the Insurer to pay the compensation cannot be avoided. Though it is contended that apart from the driver and the deceased, there was yet another passenger being carried in the vehicle, in the light of the fact that no claim has been made by the other claimant, the present claim petition filed by the legal representatives of the deceased will have to be decided on merits, as the liability of the Insurer to satisfy the compensation in respect of a driver and another passenger cannot be in dispute. 4. It is also to be borne in mind that even in a goods vehicle, carriage of persons is permitted under Rule 100 of Karnataka Motor Vehicles Rules, subject to the limitations specified therein and therefore, the liability of the Insurer cannot be avoided. 5. It is not in dispute that the deceased was aged 20 years and was an agriculturist. Since the claim was under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, as per II Schedule, taking the annual income of the deceased at Rs.40, 000.00, the legal representatives of the deceased would be entitled for a sum of Rs.5, 06, 667.00 (Rs.7, 60, 000.00 - 1/3rd) towards loss of dependency after deducting 1/3rd (as mentioned in the note to the II schedule) towards personal expenses of the deceased. 6. Apart from the above, in accordance with the judgment rendered in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. PRANAY SETHI & OTHERS - (2017) 16 SCC 680 , the claimants, being the siblings of the deceased, each of them would be entitled to Rs.44, 000.00 towards loss of consortium. 6. Apart from the above, in accordance with the judgment rendered in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. PRANAY SETHI & OTHERS - (2017) 16 SCC 680 , the claimants, being the siblings of the deceased, each of them would be entitled to Rs.44, 000.00 towards loss of consortium. They would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.33, 000.00 under conventional heads. 7. Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following sums as compensation along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realisation: 8. Consequently, the appeal is allowed to the extent stated above. It is made clear that the Insurer would be liable to pay the compensation since the liability to pay compensation is covered in view of the fact that the deceased was within the permissible carrying capacity. 9. The Insurer to deposit the amount of compensation within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. 10. The appellants, being the brothers and sister of the deceased, they would be entitled to withdraw the amount of compensation awarded above equally.