1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No. 5076 OF 2016(MV)
BETWEEN:
1. Sri. Vedamurthy,
S/o Late Chandrappa,
Aged about 49 years.
2. Minor Tanushree,
D/o Vedamurthy,
Aged about 11 years.
3. Minor Rashmitha,
D/o Vedamurthy,
Aged abut 8 years.
4. Danshu Patel,
S/o Vedamurthy,
Aged about 06 years,
Appellants No.2 to 4
Represented by their
Father and natural guardian
Appellant No.1.
All are r/at
Devaranasipura,
2
Bhadravathi Taluk,
Shivamogga District. ... Appellants
(By Sri.K.Prasanna Shetty., Advocate)
AND:
1. Sri. Sathyanarayana,
S/o Hanumantha Rao,
Aged about 36 years,
R/at No.97, Lower Hutha,
Bhadravathi-577301.
2. The Commissioner,
City Municipality,
Old Town, Bhadravathi-577301.
3. Karnataka Government
Insurance Department,
Motor Branch,
Bangalore-560 001. ... Respondents
(By Sri.H.K. Basavaraj, AGA., for R2 & R3)
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act,
against the Judgment and Award dated:08.06.2016
passed in MVC No.141/2015 on the file of the
Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Additional MACT-
12, Bhadravathi, partly allowing the claim petition for
compensation and seeking enhancement of
compensation.
This MFA, coming on for hearing, through video
conference, this day, this Court, delivered the
following:
3
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 08.06.2016 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhadravathi in MVC No.141/2015 whereby Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.4,51,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. and directed the insurance company to pay the compensation.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 28.10.2014 at about 5.00 p.m., deceased Shashikala was proceeding as a pillion rider from Kodihalli towards Devaranarasipura in the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-14/R-4567. At that time, a lorry bearing registration No.KA-14/B-0693 came at a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the motorcycle. Due to the impact, the said Shashikala sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The legal representatives of 4 the deceased have filed a claim petition in MVC No.141/2015.
3. In response to the notice issued, respondents appeared through advocates and filed written statement. In addition, it is contended by the respondent - insurance company that the claim petition filed by the claimants is not maintainable and they are not entitled for compensation. It was pleaded that the rider of the motorcycle was at fault in causing the accident and in order to escape from the liability has foisted a false complaint against the offending vehicle.
4. On the basis of the rival pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues for its consideration:-
" 1. Whether the petitioners prove that on 28.10.2014 at about 5.00 p.m. near Kodihalli Mahesh House when Shashikala 5 was moving as pillion rider on TVS motorcycle bearing No.KA-154/R-4567, the 1st respondent being the driver of lorry bearing No.K?A-14/B-06793 came from Devaranarasipura towards Bhadravathi in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed the bike of Shashikala and due to the impact she died?
2. Whether the petitioners prove that they are the legal heirs of deceased Shashikala?
3. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation as sought?
4. What order or award?"
5. In support of their case, the claimants examined the husband of the deceased as PW-1 and they have produced 20 documents as Exs.P-1 to 20. The respondents have not examined any witnesses but produced 3 documents as Exs.R1 to R3. 6
6. On the basis of the said evidence, the Tribunal answered the aforesaid issues in the following manner:
Issue No.1 : Affirmative
Issue No.2: Partly affirmative
Issue No.3: Partly affirmative.
Issue No.4: As per final order.
7. The Tribunal by judgment and award dated 08.06.2016 awarded the compensation of Rs.4,51,000/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation.
8. The learned counsel for the claimants has raised the following contentions:
Firstly, the claimants claim that the deceased was earning Rs.10,500/- per month by doing agriculture work. But the Tribunal is not justified in 7 taking the monthly income of the deceased as only Rs.3,000/-. To prove the income she has produced Ex.P13 - certificate for supply of milk and Ex.P20 - Sericulturists Pass Book.
Secondly, as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. -v- PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS [AIR 2017 SC 5157], the claimants are entitled for addition of future prospects.
Thirdly, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. -V- NANU RAM reported in 2018 ACJ 2782, each of the claimants are entitled for compensation under the head of 'loss of love and affection and consortium'.
Fourthly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the conventional heads is on the lower side. Hence, he prays for allowing the appeal. 8
9. Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the Insurance Company has raised the following counter-contentions:
Firstly, even though the claimants have produced the documents at Exs.P13 and P20, they have not examined the author of the said documents. Since the deceased was a house wife the Tribunal has rightly assessed the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.3,000/- per month.
Secondly, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.
10. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Perused the judgment and award and the original records.
9
11. It is not in dispute that deceased died in the road traffic accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver. The Tribunal after considering the materials on record has rightly assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- per month. Since the deceased was aged about 42 years, to the aforesaid amount, 25% has to be added on account of future prospects in view of the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in 'PRANAY SETHI' (supra). Thus, the monthly income comes to Rs.3,750/-, out of which, we deem it appropriate to deduct 1/3rd towards personal expenses and therefore, the monthly income comes to Rs.2,500/-. The deceased was aged about 42 years at the time of the accident and multiplier applicable to her age group is '14'. Thus, the claimants are entitled to compensation of 10 Rs.4,20,000/- (Rs.2,500*12*14) on account of 'loss of dependency'.
In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE', claimant No.1, husband of the deceased is entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head of 'loss of spousal consortium', claimant Nos.2 to 4, children are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- each under the head of 'loss of parental consortium'.
In addition, the claimants are entitled to Rs.15,000/- on account of 'loss of estate' and Rs.15,000/- on account of 'funeral expenses'.
12. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 4,20,000
Funeral expenses 15,000
Loss of estate 15,000
Loss of spousal 40,000
11
consortium
Loss of Parental 1,20,000
consortium
Total 6,10,000
The claimants are entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.6,10,000/-. The respondent No.3
- Karnataka Government Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
To the aforesaid extent, the judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part.
Sd/-
JUDGE Cm/-