Vasanthi Madivalthi vs Jeevan Shetty

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 18741 Kant
Judgement Date : 26 July, 2024

Karnataka High Court

Vasanthi Madivalthi vs Jeevan Shetty on 26 July, 2024

Author: K.Natarajan

Bench: K.Natarajan

                                                     -1-
                                                                 NC: 2024:KHC:29500
                                                               MFA No. 3855 of 2021




                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                                  DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
                                                    BEFORE
                                   THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
                           MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3855 OF 2021 (MV-D)

                      BETWEEN:
                      1.     VASANTHI MADIVALTHI
                             AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
                             W/O LATE BHASKARA MADIVALA

                      2.     VIJAYA LAKSHMI
                             AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
                             W/O RAMESH MADIVALA

                      3.     JANARDHANA
                             AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
                             S/O LATE BHASKARA MADIVALA

                      4.     GOVARDHAN
                             AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
                             S/O LATE BHASKARA MADIVALA

                             ALL ARE RESIDING AT H.NO.2-147A
                             MATHASHRI KUKKUNDI
Digitally signed by          ALANAGARU, PERDOOR POST
MARIGANGAIAH                 PERDOOR VILLAGE
PREMAKUMARI
                             UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                                                               ...APPELLANTS
KARNATAKA
                      (BY SRI.PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY.H., ADVOCATE)

                      AND:
                      1.     JEEVAN SHETTY
                             AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
                             S/O LATE BHOJA SHETTY
                             R/O CLASS I PWD CONTRACTOR BHOOMIKA
                             52 HEROOR VILLAGE
                             BRAHMAVARA TALUK
                             UDUPI DISTRICT-576213
                               -2-
                                              NC: 2024:KHC:29500
                                          MFA No. 3855 of 2021




2.   THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
     RELIANCE INDIA GEN. INS. CO. LTD.,
     DIVISIONAL OFFICE
     MAXIMUS COMMERCIAL COMPLEX
     4TH FLOOR, LIGHT HOUSE HILL ROAD
     HAMPANAKATTA
     MANGALURU-575 001
                                                  ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.H.S.LINGARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
    V/O DATED 15.12.2023, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH.)

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 02.03.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 716/2019 ON THE FILE
OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT,
UDUPI,  PARTLY   ALLOWING    THE   CLAIM  PETITION  FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:     HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN


                     ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'Act'), seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and Principal Senior Civil Judge, Udupi (Concurrent Charge) (for short, 'Tribunal') in its judgment and award in MVC.No.716/2019 dated 02.03.2021. -3-

NC: 2024:KHC:29500 MFA No. 3855 of 2021

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the material on record.

3. The case of the appellants is that they have filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation of Rs.24,31,000/- for death of the deceased Bhaskara Madivala.

4. It is alleged that on 10.03.2019 at about 11.00 a.m., when the deceased was riding the motorbike bearing registration No.KA-20-H-4771 from Perdoor side towards Karje and when he reached in front of the house of Mr.Praveen, one Tipper vehicle bearing registration No. KA-20-AA-2599 came from opposite direction and dashed to the motorbike of the deceased due to which, he sustained injuries and died in the hospital. Hence, the claimants have claimed compensation under various heads.

5. The respondent No.1 - owner of the vehicle was placed ex-parte. Respondent No.2 filed statement of -4- NC: 2024:KHC:29500 MFA No. 3855 of 2021 objections by denying the rash and negligent driving, age, occupation and income of the deceased.

6. Based on the pleadings, the Tribunal had framed three issues and the claimants have examined claimant No.1 as PW1 also one more witnesses as PW2 and got marked documents from Exs.P1 to Ex.P19. On the other hand, respondent No.2 has not chosen to lead any defense evidence.

7. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.9,46,291/- on various heads as under:

Sl.
                   Heads                         Calculation
No.
 i      Monthly income                            Rs.10,000/-
        10% of (i) above to be added       (Rs.10,000/- + Rs.1,000/-
  ii
        towards future prospects                = Rs.11,000/-)
        Deduction of ½ of income as
                                           Rs.11,000/- - Rs.5,500/-
 iii    personal expenses of       the
                                                = Rs.5,500/-
        deceased
        Compensation after multiplier       Rs.5,500/- X 12 X 11 =
iv
        11 is applied                             7,26,000/-
 v      Towards Loss of estate                    Rs.15,000/-
vi      Towards loss of consortium               Rs.1,60,000/-
vii Towards funeral expenses                      Rs.15,000/-
viii Medical Expenses                             Rs.30,291/-
     Total compensation awarded                 Rs.9,46,291/-
                              -5-
                                         NC: 2024:KHC:29500
                                      MFA No. 3855 of 2021




8. Being aggrieved by the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimants are before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation.
9. Learned counsel for the appellants has seriously contended that the Tribunal committed an error in considering the income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- per month, even though he was a Mason and was earning Rs.20,000/- per month. It is further submitted that the Tribunal also committed error in taking 50% of the income towards personal expenditure of the deceased, for a married person which is against the judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of SARLA VERMA (SMT.) AND OTHERS V. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER (2009)6 SCC 121 and NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. -v- PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS [AIR 2017 SC 5157] Hence, the prayed for enhancing the compensation.
-6-

NC: 2024:KHC:29500 MFA No. 3855 of 2021

10. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 Insurance Company supported the judgment of the Tribunal.

11. Considering the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusing the records, the only question that arises for my consideration is:

"Whether the appellants are entitled for enhancement of compensation? If so, to what extent?"

12. As per the records, the accident in question is not in dispute and no appeal is filed by the respondents questioning the liability, hence only the question of quantum of compensation has to be assessed by this Court.

13. The Tribunal considered the income of the deceased only at Rs.10,000/- per month, even though it was claimed Rs.20,000/- per month. Even in the Legal Services Authority chart, normally for the accident -7- NC: 2024:KHC:29500 MFA No. 3855 of 2021 occurred in the year 2019, the notional income of the deceased shall be considered at Rs.14,000/- per month. Therefore, monthly income of the deceased assessed at Rs.10,000/- by the Tribunal is not correct. As per the PRANAY SETHI (supra), 10% of the income shall be added towards future prospects. Then, the notional income of the deceased would be Rs.15,400/- p.m. (Rs.14,000 x 10% = Rs.1,400/-.

Rs.14,000+1,400=Rs.15,400/-. )

14. The Tribunal has also committed an error in deducting 50% towards the personal expenditure of the deceased. When the deceased was a married person and claimant Nos.2 to 4 are children, 1/3rd i.e., Rs.5,133/- shall be deducted towards his personal expenditure which would amount to Rs.10,266/- p.m. (Rs.15,400/- - Rs.5,133/- = Rs.10,266/-). The appropriate multiplier to be adopted is 11. Hence, the claimants are entitled to loss of dependency in a sum of Rs.13,55,112/-. (Rs.10,266 x 12 x 11).

-8-

NC: 2024:KHC:29500 MFA No. 3855 of 2021

15. As per the decision of the Honb'le Apex Court in MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v/s NANU RAM ALIAS CHUHRU RAM AND OTHERS (Civil Appeal No.9581/2018), the Tribunal has rightly awarded a sum of Rs.1,60,000/- towards loss of consortium to all the claimants. In all other respects, the Tribunal has awarded just compensation, which warrants no interference by this Court. The amount awarded towards loss of estate and funeral expenses is retained. Hence, the claimants are entitled to total compensation as follows:

Sl.
                  Heads                         Calculation
No.
 i      Monthly income                           Rs.14,000/-
        10% of (i) above to be added      (Rs.14,000/- + Rs.1,400/-
  ii
        towards future prospects               = Rs.15,400/-)
        Deduction of 1/3 of income as
                                            Rs.15,400/- x 1/3 =
 iii    personal expenses of       the
                                          Rs.5,133/- = Rs.10,266/-
        deceased
        Compensation after multiplier      Rs.10,266/- X 12 X 11 =
iv
        11 is applied                            13,55,112/-
 v      Towards Loss of estate                   Rs.15,000/-
vi      Towards loss of consortium              Rs.1,60,000/-
vii Towards funeral expenses                     Rs.15,000/-
viii Medical Expenses                            Rs.30,291/-
     Total compensation awarded                Rs.15,75,403/-
                             -9-
                                             NC: 2024:KHC:29500
                                          MFA No. 3855 of 2021




16. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The Appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The judgment and award dated 02.03.2021, passed by the learned Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and Principal Senior Civil Judge. Udupi (Concurrent Charge) in MVC.No.716/2019, is modified to the extent that the compensation awarded at Rs.9,46,291/- is enhanced, thus fixing the total compensation at Rs.15,75,500/-

(Rupees Fifteen Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand Five Hundred only) with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

(iii) Respondent No.2-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the awarded amount, along with the interest within sixty days from today.

(iv) The apportionment, as ordered by the Tribunal is retained.

- 10 -

NC: 2024:KHC:29500 MFA No. 3855 of 2021 Draw modified award accordingly. The Registry to transmit a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal without delay.

Sd/-

(K.NATARAJAN) JUDGE NC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37