Sowmya @ Narasamma vs Putta Boregowda
2021 Latest Caselaw 5225 Kant

                                1


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                           BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

               M.F.A. NO.9538 OF 2015 (MV-D)

BETWEEN:

1.     SOWMYA @ NARASAMMA
       W/O. LATE E. NATARAJA,
       AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS

2.     YOGESH
       S/O. SOWMYA @ NARASAMMA,
       AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS,

       BOTH ARE RESIDING AT K.R. SAGARA,
       RAILWAY STATION ROAD,
       BELAGOLA HOBLI,
       SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK,
       MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 401.

       (APPELLANT NO.2 IS MINOR AND
       REPRESENTED BY HIS NATURAL
       GUARDIAN AND NEXT FRIEND
       MOTHER APPELLANT NO.1)
                                           ... APPELLANTS
(BY SMT.SUKANYA D, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     PUTTA BOREGOWDA
       S/O. LATE BEEYANNA,
       R/O. BALAGHATTA VILLAGE,
                               2


     PANDAVAPURA TALUK,
     MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 401.

2.   BRANCH MANAGER
     NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
     2ND CROSS, ASHOKA NAGARA
     MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 401.
                                    ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.KESHAV PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR
    SRI.S.SRISHAILA, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
    NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH
    V/O DATED 25.11.2019)

     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.09.2013 PASSED IN MVC
NO.1659/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, SRIRANGAPATNA, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

    THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                         JUDGMENT

The captioned appeal is filed by the claimants seeking

enhancement of compensation.

2. The appellants filed claim petition for having lost

one Nataraja in a road traffic accident dated 27.03.2009. The

claim petition was filed by contending that deceased was doing

agricultural work and business and was earning a sum of

Rs.10,000/- p.m. The appellants in support of their contention

examined the widow as PW.1 and one witness as PW.2 and

adduced documentary evidence vide Exs.P-1 to P-7. The

respondent No.2/Insurance Company by way of rebuttal

evidence lead in ocular evidence of its official as RW.1 and did

not adduce any documentary evidence.

3. The Tribunal in absence of income proof, assessed

the income of the deceased notionally at Rs.150/- per day

which works out to Rs.4,500/- per month and by deducting

1/3rd and by applying multiplier of 16, has awarded a sum of

Rs.5,76,000/- under the head 'loss of dependency'. Under

conventional heads, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of

Rs.50,000/-. The Tribunal has also awarded a sum of

Rs.1,02,000/- towards medical expenses. The Tribunal, in all,

has awarded total compensation of Rs.7,28,000/-.

4. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and

learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2/Insurance

Company. Perused the records.

5. Though this Court cannot find fault with the finding

of the Tribunal in assessing the income of the deceased

notionally at Rs.4,500/-, however, on re-appreciation of oral

and documentary evidence, this Court would find that the

income notionally assessed by the Tribunal is marginally on

the lower side. In absence of income proof, this Court by

placing reliance on the chart issued by the legal services

authority would notionally assess the income of the deceased

at Rs.5,000/-. The Tribunal has not added future prospects.

Therefore, having regard to the age of the deceased which is

32 years, 40% needs to be added towards future prospects.

Therefore, the income of the deceased is notionally assessed

at Rs.7,000/- and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal

expenses, the income is assessed at Rs.4,666/- and by

applying multiplier of 16, the compensation payable under the

head 'loss of dependency' works out to Rs.8,96,000/-

(4,666x12x16).

6. Under conventional heads, since there are two

dependants, by applying the principles laid down by the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General

Insurance Co. Ltd., vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram &

Ors.1, a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- is awarded. The medical bills of

Rs.1,02,000/- awarded by the Tribunal remains undisturbed.

Hence, the total compensation re-determined by this Court

works out to Rs.11,08,000/- as against Rs.7,28,000/- awarded

by the Tribunal.

7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The

judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified. The

appellants are held entitled to enhanced compensation of

Rs.3,80,000/- which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per

annum from the date of petition till realisation. However, it is

2018 (9) SC 51

made clear that the appellants are not entitled to interest for

the delay period of 729 days as ordered by this Court.

Sd/-

JUDGE

CA