{"id":132127,"date":"2010-09-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010"},"modified":"2018-12-10T16:35:52","modified_gmt":"2018-12-10T11:05:52","slug":"kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance … on 15 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance … on 15 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: N.K.Patil And K.Govindarajulu<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE\nDATED THIS THE 15%' DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2010,\n\n: PRESENT :\n\nTI-IE I-ION'BLE mm. JUSTICE N.K. PA';.FIIJ,'[:  A. \n\nAND\n\nTHE I~\u00a7ON'BLE MR. JUsTIc1z;;i{}G0v1'1szfDA1i5JI;LIi'~' L' \n\nM.F.A.NO. 2810 OF:42_0'O5z{MV}.'v_*v_l'  - = \" \"\n\nBetween:\n\n1. Smt. Kusuma Bhat,\"   \" ll\nW\/0. Late K. Jayarama _B11at:{f ;\n\nAged about 42 years.    \n\n2. Kum. K.  Pa11A'va\u00a71;.l'71_:i.; V __  j'\nD\/o. Lat_e?.K. .}ayaraina;.l3hat.,  l \nAged aboli\ufb01-\"1 8._  ~ \n\n3. Smt: Parara\ufb01hi.   4' \n\nW\/0. Late Eshwara Bhat,\n about years.\n\nV\" \"A11 \ufb01e :l?{e_siding\"a\u00a3\n\n V' \" =NA0',.,965;l. lli -Block,\n I11 ge. .'We'st of Chord Road,\n\n. \"Basav'es_hx:varanagar,\n\"-\u00ab.._Bax_1'g'ale1*e--560 07 8.\n\nA--3...Is Dead, Hence,\n\nx 'l  \u00abRepresented by\n\n\"  Appellants 1 8: 2, above\n\n Appellants\n{By Sri. N. Shankar Narayana Bhat, Advocate}\n\nAM\n\nI\n\n\\\"\"f\n\n\n\n3-.e..\n\nELIE\n\n1. The United India Insurance\nCompany Limited,\nPost Box No.75,\nChitradurga~577 501,\nRepresented by its\nManager.\n\n2. The New India Assurance\n\nCompany Limited,\n\nDivisional Office-VIEI,\n\n671600, No. 47, I Floor, _ _\nGopai Complex, Bazar Street', .  \"\nYashwanthapura, v    _ \" ~\nBanga1ore--22 C C    _\nRepresented by its Manager, ., \n\n3. Sri. M.V.'rmp;pes~Namy,   _ \nS\/o. S111;\"1'Ji...__Vive:}:andai'ah,  \nMajor, Prop:_.M\/sd.'  at ' \nThippesWa,rny*Ifrar:sport Semgres.\n\nIII Cross, wJ;VC.R,i. 'Extension, .\nChitra~:iurga;7f'-.,AV'   ' '\n\n4. J. Venk.atesnn3,_nurt.P1}'.:'a\"_;~ 4\ns__\/mo. Yelakaiahg \n\n, Major, \"  A V\n- .,._Driver, 4; 160, 8'\ufb01'1\"Main,\n\n .. RBI Colony, Srirarnapuram,\n\n V _ Bangajore, \n._ \"     Respondents<\/pre>\n
[By Sri._P.B–,V_ Raj u, Advocate for R1;
\n Srnt. Harini Shivananda, Advocate for R2;<\/p>\n
 * Served but unrepresented;\n<\/p>\n
 as ,  R44 — notice is dispensed with v\/ o dated 31.01.08)<\/p>\n
=l\u00a2*=lH!=**<\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
This MFA is filed U\/S 173(1) of MV act against the
\nJudgment and Award dated: 22\/11\/2004 passed in MVC
\nNo.3985\/ 1998 on the file of the XIX Additional SCJ and
\nMACT, Bangalore, {SCCH–17), partly allowing the claim
\npetition for compensation and seeking enhancement of
\ncompensation.  V<\/p>\n
This MFA coming on for Hearing,.{_  <\/p>\n
N.K. PATIL. J ., delivered the foliowing:   _
\nJ U D G 1yi_c\u00a7_1g\\i T ~ ”\n<\/p>\n
This appeal by the c1aiIr1ants’_”is:’ <\/p>\n
the judgment and award”dated Q25? <\/p>\n
passed in M.V.C.N0..3985\/  on thhefilep  the XIX<\/p>\n
Additional SCJ and “Motor _1i\u00e9;\u00a2\u00a2;ii\u00a3I’\u00a2iiiu,’pf Claims Tribunal,<\/p>\n
Bangalore’   short, “I’ribuna1′ ] for<\/p>\n
enhancenient oi’c’o;r1pe:r.;sation on the ground that, the<\/p>\n
 , g_ coni.pensation”of Rs_,3,22,000\/\u00bb awarded in favour of the<\/p>\n
‘ c1aiInarit~s;’as”against their ciaim for Rs.19.85 Lakhs, is<\/p>\n
inadequate.\n<\/p>\n
if .. The facts in brief are that, the third appellant<\/p>\n
dd’  more and she is represented by appellants 1 and 2<\/p>\n
A  who are the wife and daughter of deceased K. Jayarain<\/p>\n
Ag”\n<\/p>\n
1;\n<\/p>\n
Bhat. They filed the claim petition under Section__._I_’66 of<\/p>\n
the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that at ab’o’Le\u00a3t”g*\u00ab<\/p>\n
AM, on 19-03-1998, the deceased was tret\u00a72e11if;gir;~e:5n<\/p>\n
Bangalore to Chitradurga in his””own’  it<\/p>\n
bearing No.KA–20\/M4091 V and  it  driveir  ‘  u<\/p>\n
said car was driving s1ow1yg”a.nd cautioiisly; when it’<\/p>\n
reached near C.B.  Kaiiainbella, Sira
\nTaluk, Tumkur District,-.’a  No.KA–16\/A-
\n4849, being \u00a7di’iyeZi1 at  speed, in a rash
\nand  the Car. Due to
\nthe   injuries and died.\n<\/p>\n
He washale “prior to the date of accident,<\/p>\n
which Lg:-estjited  death. It is the case of the<\/p>\n
 appeI1a”dntsd’e.that,  deceased was a business man,<\/p>\n
   of Maheswara Agro Chemicals and<\/p>\n
aged abovt7ti3 years, earning a sum of Rs.10,000\/\u00abv per<\/p>\n
3   mo_nth”and was an income tax assessee. In View of his<\/p>\n
“Lir”1’tir:r1e1y death, the family has become haywire and<\/p>\n
%,,,e_i\u00bb<\/p>\n
K<\/p>\n
K.\n<\/p>\n
they are in great financial distress. Therefore, they have<\/p>\n
to be compensated adequately.\n<\/p>\n
3. On account of the death of the  <\/p>\n
appellants filed the claim petition\u00bb-befc-‘_re’Dthie,<\/p>\n
seeking compensation of a  <\/p>\n
against the respondents.’   had’<\/p>\n
come up for considei-a.tion.Al’befoi’eVf’th’e Tribunal on 22nd
\nNovember 2004.  TI’ ‘considering the<\/p>\n
relevant material_’ -ava-__ilab}.e’i on fil.e.  after appreciation<\/p>\n
of thevohral  allowed the claim
\npetition  a sum of Rs.3,22,000\/– under<\/p>\n
different   interest per annum. from the<\/p>\n
l  date dffpe’ti,tion  date of payment, after deducting<\/p>\n
   toWa_rds..’eontributory negligence on the part of the<\/p>\n
driver..__”ol’-the deceased. Being dissatis\ufb01ed with the<\/p>\n
  i.q?.1_antuI\u00a2n of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and<\/p>\n
 contributory negligence of 50% \ufb01xed by Tribunal,<\/p>\n
‘ V’ “the appellants are in appeal before this Court, seeking<\/p>\n
enhancement of compensation and also to set aside the<\/p>\n
contributory negligence.\n<\/p>\n
4. We have heard learned counseliorappellantg <\/p>\n
and learned counsel for first   <\/p>\n
Insurance Companies for,*consid’e_ra’ble l.erigi.h of :’;ti.1*ne_.’,<\/p>\n
Respondent No.3 is served unrepresented. Notice
\nto fourth responden*t–..is  vide order dated<\/p>\n
3151 January 2008.  it<\/p>\n
   counsel for the parties,
\nafter careful  judgment and award passed<\/p>\n
by 5 the  andlwafter going through the original<\/p>\n
  made available, it is seen that the occurrence of<\/p>\n
A  : resultant death of the deceased are not<\/p>\n
int di.s’p’u,te. The deceased was a businessman in<\/p>\n
 nC.hemicals and Fertilizers and has been filing his<\/p>\n
 returns regularly. The Income tax returns for the years<\/p>\n
 1990-91 till the date of accident has been placed before<\/p>\n
4._._……\n<\/p>\n
X<\/p>\n
5′<\/p>\n
the Court. The Advance income tax paid receipts and<\/p>\n
the Income Tax clearance Certificates are also<\/p>\n
before us. It shows that the deceased <\/p>\n
income of around Rs.1,4O,OO:G\/1.’–,Th’e tis:i.\u00abu;;a:..,.ha.s it<\/p>\n
grossly erred in arriving at —\n<\/p>\n
income of the deceased  ‘loss of’<\/p>\n
dependency. Having~.regard”‘to..’theincorne’  returns
\nfor three years just   accident, and
\nother aspects,  ‘–an,d__V:V.fappr0priate to re-
\nassess  “per month. From the
\nsaid   towards his personal
\nand  net monthly income comes to<\/p>\n
Rs.;4,=866\/u–.’.  “Since the deceased was 43 years, the<\/p>\n
 ” iinnltiplierviias\u00e9 per the decision of the Hon’bie Apex<\/p>\n
I   Verma’s case (2009 ACJ 1298) is ’14’<\/p>\n
and a-sioptithe same as against ’12’ adopted by Tribunal.<\/p>\n
  Accordingly, we re–determine compensation payable<\/p>\n
i”-towiards loss of dependency at Rs.’\/,83,888\/– [i.e.<\/p>\n
K\/,f_M_,,,,…J<\/p>\n
Rs.4,666\/– x 12 X ‘l4’) as against Rs.6,24.,_QO0\/-<\/p>\n
awarded by Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
6. Further, the Tribunal also crred- <\/p>\n
awarding any compensation toWa1’ds loss. o’f’._1oVeCar1d 9<\/p>\n
affection and loss of estate.\n<\/p>\n
behind his wife and daughterV:”~-iTherefore, <\/p>\n
to the facts and circi1:1_i_sta1*1c’e’sVe.: caslefwye award a
\nsum of Rs.l0,000\/–  and affection
\nand a sum    .1.osslVof estate.\n<\/p>\n
7.     *Rs.1o,oo0\/- towards
\n  funeral expenses and
\na suin’ of “towards loss of consortium<\/p>\n
awarded  V-Tlfribiinal  just and proper and does not<\/p>\n
by ” call for interference.\n<\/p>\n
  as rightly pointed out by learned<\/p>\n
cou-nse’l’ap’pearing for appellants, fixing of 50% liability<\/p>\n
  on_.the'”ch’iver of the Car of the deceased is on the higher<\/p>\n
“side: and needs to be modified. In support of his<\/p>\n
 “submission, he has t\ufb01n us through paragraph 10 of<\/p>\n
f’A’_–_'”__,._u-‘<\/p>\n
the order passed by Tribunal and,’ wherein it is_..stated<\/p>\n
that PWS. 2 and 3 are the witnesses to spot”:Mahazar<\/p>\n
Ex.P2 and they have stated in their evidelncethatl <\/p>\n
accident occurred due to rash:-and’\u00abnegligent;drivirigxnof l<\/p>\n
Tanker vehicle. PW3 has statedalinllhgis V’<\/p>\n
statement has been recorded  thefslnkjestigatingl<\/p>\n
Officer. The Spot accident
\noccurred on a 23  way running
\nfrom North to’   also reveals that
\nthe  it left side of the road
\n   reveals that there is a
\nmud  Vof “either side of the tar road.<\/p>\n
Thereforeqathyere’Was still space for the Tanker on the<\/p>\n
 Left  ci\ufb02the  to avoid the accident. Having<\/p>\n
I  .’regard:v4t0.,.lVthA’eevidence of PWs. 2 and 3 and the fact that<\/p>\n
Tanker’ lisjla large vehicle compared to the Car, the<\/p>\n
   held that the accident has occurred due to the<\/p>\n
“‘v.cc1n’posite negligence of Car and Tanker in the ratio of<\/p>\n
i it ” 50:50. It is not disputed that due to rash and negligent<\/p>\n
%M.\n<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
driving by the driver of Tanker, it has hit the<\/p>\n
Ambassador Car and the deceased has <\/p>\n
the injuries. Admittedly. the Engine of <\/p>\n
more horsepower than the Engine’ of a Car,” ‘”i5hisV’ asfpect ‘<\/p>\n
of the matter has not been deaii-ti  .a. <\/p>\n
perspective. The Tribunal i–1as..,a1soV’ not as_\u00a3;igxned”CogentV’<\/p>\n
and convincing reasons to;c’oiri_:e:’ the conclusion that
\nthe driver of the  in  _t_h:eA_’.:Vvdeceased was an
\ninmate had.  that 50% to the
\naccident.    the oral evidence of
\nPWs.  thevduritnesses to the spot
\n  evidence at EX.P2\\<\/p>\n
spot’Mahaaar,V’it”‘is.’crvsta1 clear that the driver of the<\/p>\n
 haveti avoided the accident had he been<\/p>\n
 caiLitio”ds’\u00abcortipiared to the driver of the Car. Therefore,<\/p>\n
taking..jthe”‘ aforesaid aspects into consideration, we<\/p>\n
3   deem it tit and proper to set aside the 50% contributory<\/p>\n
“negligence \ufb01xed by Tribunal and re–fiX the contributory<\/p>\n
tduiiiiegligence \/ liability in the ratio of 75:25, Le. 75% on<\/p>\n
7\u00e9i,,e\/<\/p>\n
ll<\/p>\n
the driver of the Tanker and 25% on the driver.–of the<\/p>\n
Car, to meet the ends of justice.\n<\/p>\n
9. In the light of the facts and  <\/p>\n
the case, as stated above, the a.p’p’ea1.\ufb011’tad.byV’appe–1ants<\/p>\n
is allowed in part. The impugned and <\/p>\n
dated 221301 November <\/p>\n
\/ 1998, on the \ufb01le of    Motor
\nAccident Claims  {SCCH–1’7], is
\nhereby modifiedi.’  Rs.8,23,888\/- as
\nagainst  by the Tribunal, with
\ninterezjistmat:  enhanced sum, from
\nthe  ofthe date of realization. The<\/p>\n
break\u00bb-up is as fol’loW’s:\n<\/p>\n
   of Debendency<\/p>\n
Rs. 7,83,888\/–\n<\/p>\n
 _’\u00a7oW’ard.sA’L.o;\u00a7s of love and affection Rs. 10,000\/–<\/p>\n
9″Ton\/ards””~.Los:st””of estate \/ loss of Rs. 10,000\/–<\/p>\n
expectancy *<\/p>\n
Towards loss of consortium Rs. 10,000 \/ —<\/p>\n
‘*.Towai*dsi- transportation of dead Rs. 10,000\/–<\/p>\n
it   body and funeral expenses<\/p>\n
TOTAL Rs. 8.23.888\/–\n<\/p>\n
;4W..a<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
Out of Rs.8,23,888\/~, if 25% is deducted towards<\/p>\n
contributory negligence on the part of the driest”-..of:.the<\/p>\n
offending Car, the net compensation  <\/p>\n
appellants comes to Rs.6;’1A’?,’9’l6;’:’,-  <\/p>\n
Rs.3,22,000\/–. The enhanced <\/p>\n
Rs.2,95,916\/-.\n<\/p>\n
The first  Company is
\ndirected to   ” compensation of
\nRs.2,95,9i14B;’}y at 6% per annum,
\nwithin  Adate\ufb02fof receipt of copy of ‘the<\/p>\n
judgrnent and  < ..  . .\n<\/p>\n
 Iznjnnyediatlely——oil such deposit by the Insurance<\/p>\n
   of the enhanced compensation of<\/p>\n
r'<s;2;95_;9si'i;3)*i~, a sum of Rs.2,00,000\/- with<\/p>\n
 proportionate interest, shall be invested in Fixed<\/p>\n
"_ADepA'osit, in any.Nationa1ized or Scheduled Bank, in the<\/p>\n
 …_"1pp"1_"_i_arr1e of the first appellant, for a period of five years,<\/p>\n
%v..W.s<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
renewable by another \ufb01ve years, with liberty reserved to<\/p>\n
her to withdraw the interest periodically.<\/p>\n
The remaining sum of _ Rs7–95,9:I_8\/  <\/p>\n
proportionate interest shall be  ‘ii11_di’a:\\:fo1iViVt}1}e<\/p>\n
appellants 1 and 2 in equaipiiopolttion,
\nOffice to draw Vasyard,aeeoifdiiigly. it<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance … on 15 September, 2010 Author: N.K.Patil And K.Govindarajulu IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 15%’ DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2010, : PRESENT : TI-IE I-ION’BLE mm. JUSTICE N.K. PA’;.FIIJ,'[: A. AND THE I~\u00a7ON’BLE MR. JUsTIc1z;;i{}G0v1’1szfDA1i5JI;LIi’~’ L’ M.F.A.NO. 2810 OF:42_0’O5z{MV}.’v_*v_l’ – […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-132127","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nKusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance ... on 15 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance ... on 15 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-10T11:05:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance … on 15 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-10T11:05:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1555,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010\",\"name\":\"Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance ... on 15 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-10T11:05:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance … on 15 September, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance ... on 15 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance ... on 15 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-10T11:05:52+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance … on 15 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-10T11:05:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010"},"wordCount":1555,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010","name":"Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance ... on 15 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-10T11:05:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kusuma-bhat-vs-the-united-india-insurance-on-15-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kusuma Bhat vs The United India Insurance … on 15 September, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132127","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=132127"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132127\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=132127"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=132127"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=132127"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}