Karnataka High Court
Sharanabasappa And Anr vs Moulali And Anr on 26 July, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403
MFA No. 201201 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
MISC. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201201 OF 2018 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. SHARANABASAPPA S/O BASAVARAJ BIRADAR
AGE: 35 YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURE,
2. SMT. LAXMI W/O SHARANABASAPPA BIRADAR
AGE: 29 YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
BOTH ARE R/O. HIPPARGA,
TQ. BASAVKALYAN DIST. BIDAR
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SHIVASHANKAR H. MANUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by
KHAJAAMEEN L 1. MOULALI S/O RUKUMSAB
MALAGHAN
Location: HIGH AGE: MAJOR OCC: BUSINESS,
COURT OF R/O. SANNUR VILLAGE
KARNATAKA
TQ. & DIST. GULBARGA-585101.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
BHARTI AXA GEN. INSURANCE CO. LTD,
S.B. COLLEGE ROAD, GULBARGA-585101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MANJUNATH MALLAYYA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 28.05.2019 NOTICE TO R1 IS
DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403
MFA No. 201201 of 2018
THIS MFA FILED IS UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF M.V.
ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY ENHANCING THE
COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.01.2018 PASSED BY THE I
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KALABURAGI, IN MVC.NO.265/2015.
THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 03.07.2024, COMING ON FOR
'PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT' THIS DAY, THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA) This appeal is by the claimant against the judgment and award passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Member, MACT, Kalaburagi in MVC.No.265/2015 dated 02.01.2018 for enhancement of compensation. -3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018
02. The parties will be referred to as per their ranks before the Trial Court for sake of convenience.
03. Brief facts of the case are that on 23.06.2014 around 06.00 p.m. the deceased - Mallikarjun was standing by the side of the road; he met with an accident due to rash and negligent riding of motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-32-EE-4163 by its rider. As a result of which, the said deceased - Mallikarjun aged about 05 years sustained fatal injuries and on the way to the Hospital, he died.
04. It is further cases of the claimants that the date of birth of the deceased was 28.03.2009 and was aged about 05 years at the time of accident. He was studying in LKG and he was brilliant student, he was only son of the claimants. Due to the death of said Mallikarjun, the claimants have lost their love and affection. With these reasons, they prayed to award the compensation of Rs.51,00,000/-.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018
05. The respondent No.2 denied the contents of the claim petition and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
06. From the rival contentions of both the parties, the Tribunal had framed the necessary issues for determination.
07. The claimants to prove their case examined PW.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 7. The respondents have not led any evidence.
08. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties and appreciating the evidence available on record had awarded the compensation of Rs.3,75,000/-.
09. Heard the arguments of the learned counsels for both the parties.
10. The learned counsel for the claimants would submit that the Coordinate Bench of this Court in MFA.No.640/2012 (MV) in the case of Smt. Saritha vs. A.V. Kumar and others, decided on 04.03.2014, -5- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018 wherein the minor girl aged about 04 years had died in the accident, this Court had awarded the compensation of Rs.5,50,000/-. The learned counsel has relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal and another vs. Lala and others1. He has also relied on the judgment on the produced by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 in the case of Meena Devi vs. Nunu Chand Mahto @ Nemchand Mahto and others, in SLP. (Civil) No.5345/2019 dated 13.10.2022. The learned counsel for the claimants relying on the said judgments, submitted that in the case of Meena Devi, the Hon'ble Apex Court, considering its earlier judgments held that as per schedule -II, notional income of a minor for non-earning member has taken at Rs.15,000/- by the amended Act of 1994. Due to inflation, reduction of value of the rupees, it has taken income of a non-earning member could be considered as Rs.30,000/- per annum. On the basis of the age of the parents, applied multiplier at 15 and enhanced the amount of 1 (2014) 1 SCC 244 -6- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018 compensation. In this case the accident had taken place during the year 2004, nearly after 10 years from the date of accident as referred to the case of Kishan Gopal. Therefore, due to the inflation as well as drastic reduction on the money value income it could be taken at double the amount assessed in the case of Kishan Gopal and the income could be taken as Rs.60,000/- per annum in the case of death of a minor.
11. The learned counsel has further submitted that in the case of M/s. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited vs. H. Mallika Bee and others, in CMA.No.1625/2020 and CMP.No.11960/2020, the High Court of Madras, assessed the compensation by considering as the boy was earning who was aged about 15 years and taken the income as Rs.3,500/- per month. The High Court of Madras has also observed that the minor is a non-earning member, therefore, question of spending money towards personal expenses, do not arises. Therefore, there cannot be deduction towards personal -7- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018 expenses. Accordingly, for the death of a boy aged about 15 years, the compensation was awarded at Rs.11,69,000/- was reduced to Rs.7,45,000/-.
12. Considering the sad facts and circumstances, the just and reasonable amount of compensation is to be awarded in the present case.
13. The learned counsel for the respondent - insurer had submitted that the in the case of Smt. Saritha, referred supra, the boy was 04 years. This Court awarded the compensation of Rs.5,50,000/-, relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal. Normally, the depending upon the age of the minor this Court time and again awarded the compensation relying on the Kishan Gopal's case. He further submits that in the case of Meena Devi as referred supra, the Hon'ble Apex Court considered all its previous judgments and awarded the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- by the judgment dated 30.10.2022. In the case of Kishan Gopal, the boy met with an accident and -8- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018 died who was aged about 10 years and as per the facts of that case, the said boy was assisting the parents in their business. Considering the said facts, the Hon'ble Apex Court considered the notional income as Rs.30,000/- per annum. That is not applicable to the facts of the present case.
14. He has further submitted that only on the ground of decreasing in the value of money or inflation, the notional income cannot be increased. It is uncertain in the case of minor regarding the future prospects. Therefore, the submission of the learned counsel for the claimants is not acceptable and at the most this Court may follow the Meena Devi's case as referred supra and pass suitable orders in this regard. With these reasons prayed to dismiss the appeal.
15. It is not in dispute that the minor boy aged below 05 years sustained injuries in the vehicle accident and he died. He was studying in LKG. In case of death, the minor assessment of the compensation is a difficult task, -9- NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018 because he is a non-earning member of the family, multiplier could be considered only after certain age. As per the earlier schedule-II (under Section 163(A) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988) it would start from the age of 15 years. Due to the mortality rate during the childhood, it is difficult to assess the life span of a minor that too below the age of 05 years, during which period immunity to resist of the diseases are less.
16. The below the age of 05 years, a child completely or partially depending upon its parents to do daily its pursuits.
17. The Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Saritha, as referred supra, observed that in the case of Kishan Gopal, the compensation was assessed at Rs.5,00,000/- for the death of the child who was aged about 10 years. In the case of Smt. Saritha, referred above, a child about 04 years died in the motor vehicle accident. The Coordinate Bench of this Court was of the opinion that the age of the deceased child is not material
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018 whether it was of 04 years or 10 years, the compensation shall be paid as held in the case of Kishan Gopal, otherwise, it would hit under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, global compensation of Rs.5,50,000/- was awarded in the said case with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
18. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Chetana and others vs. Babuji M and others2, made a distinction between two groups. One is child another is adolescent, as per the Child and Adolescent Act, 1986. In that case, the deceased was aged about 17 years and his notional income was taken at the rate of Rs.10,250/- and multiplier taken at 16 as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another3 and awarded the compensation of Rs.16,99,800/-. 2 2021 (1) KLJ 249 (DB) 3 AIR 2009 SC 3104
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018
19. The learned counsel for the claimants has relied upon the judgment of High Court of Madras in the case of H. Mallika Bee as referred supra and submits that the learned Single Judge, of Madras High Court considering the earlier law rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, calculated the compensation considering the age of the earning member, assessed the notional income as Rs.42,000/- per annum and applied multiplier at 15 for the death of the child of 13 years and in all awarded the compensation of Rs.7,45,000/-.
20. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kurvan Ansari @ Kurvan Ali and another vs. Shyam Kishore Murm and another4, wherein the child who was aged about 07 years died and accident taken place in the year 2004, the notional income was taken as Rs.25,000/- per annum, applied multiplier as 15 and assessed loss of dependency as Rs.3,75,000/- and awarded Rs.55,000/- towards conventional heads and total compensation of Rs.4,20,000/- was awarded.
4 (2022) 1 SCC 317
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018
21. In the case of Kishan Gopal, for the death of the child who was aged about 10 years, the notional income of the deceased was taken as Rs.30,000/- and the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- is awarded.
22. The submission of the learned counsel for the claimants that in the case of Kishan Gopal, the accident had taken place during the year 2004 and in the present case, the accident had taken place during the year 2014. Due to inflation the cast of rupees became less. Therefore, the income could be taken as the double the amount of notional income assessed in the case of Kishan Gopal and the income could be taken at Rs.60,000/- per annum. The said submission cannot be considered to the facts and circumstances of the present case, for the reasons that the deceased was aged below 05 years as on the date of the accident. He was said to be studying in LKG, therefore, on that basis also his future prospects cannot be presumed. Considering the case of Meena Devi, which is applicable to the facts of the present case.
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018
23. It is deemed appropriate to award the global compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- on all heads as assessed in the case of Meena Devi referred supra.
24. Accordingly, the claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation at Rs.1,25,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of its realization.
25. For the above said reasons, I proceed to pass the following;
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The impugned judgment and award passed by the
I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Member, MACT, Kalaburagi in MVC.No.265/2015 dated 02.01.2018 is modified;
A) The claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation of Rs.1,25,000/- with interest on the enhanced amount of compensation at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5403 MFA No. 201201 of 2018 iii. The respondent No.2 - insurance company shall deposit the said amount with interest within a period of 02 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
iv. The order pertaining to apportionment, deposit and release of the amount, passed by the Tribunal is not disturbed.
The registry is directed to send the copy of this judgment to the Tribunal forthwith.
Sd/-
(UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE KJJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14 CT:PK