Karnataka High Court
Smt B Shashikala vs The Manager on 2 December, 2021
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.4593 OF 2020(MV)
BETWEEN:
1. Smt. B.Shashikala,
W/o Late N.Bhakthavathsalam
@ Babu,
Aged about 46 years.
2. B.Ishwarya,
D/o Late N.Bhakthavathsala
@ Babu,
Aged about 22 years.
3. N.Chandra,
W/o Late.M.Narayanaswamy,
Aged about 71 years,
All are R/at No.69,
4th D-main,
A.D.Block, Srirampuram,
Bengaluru-560 021. ... Appellants
(By Sri. K.V. Naik, Advocate)
AND:
1. The Manager,
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
No.1007, No.37,
Yellappa Chetty Layout,
M.G.Road, Ulsoor,
Bengaluru-560 001.
2
2. Kavi Logistics
Rep. by its proprietor,
No.4/1, 2nd Main Road,
Near: sun rise Circle,
Srirampuram,
Bengaluru-560 021. ... Respondents
(By Sri. A.R.Lakshminarayana, Advocate for R1:
Notice to R2 D/W V/o dated:17.11.2021)
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act,
against the Judgment and Award dated:04.03.2020 passed
in MVC No.3433/2019 on the file of the 3rd Additional
Judge and Member MACT, Court of Small Causes,
Bangalore (SCCH-18), allowing the claim petition for
compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.
This MFA, coming on for admission, this day, this
Court, delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act',
for short) has been filed by the claimants being
aggrieved by the judgment dated 04.03.2020 passed
by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru
(SCCH-18) in MVC No.3433/2019.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 11.05.2019 at about 7.45
p.m. the deceased Bhakthavathsalam was proceeding
in a bicycle on R.P.road, near Iyappa Temple Bridge,
Sreerampuram, Bengaluru towards Malleswaram
Railway Station. At that time, the driver of the canter
bearing registration No.KA-02/AG-5900 drove the
same at a high speed and in a rash and negligent
manner, dashed against the bicycle of the deceased.
As a result of the aforesaid accident, the deceased
sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the
injuries at the hospital on 12.05.2019.
3. The claimants filed a petition under Section
166 of the Act seeking compensation for the death of
the deceased along with interest.
4. On service of summons, the respondent
No.1 appeared through counsel and filed written
statement in which the averments made in the
petition were denied. The age, occupation and income
of the deceased are denied. It was pleaded that the
petition itself is false and frivolous in the eye of law.
It was further pleaded that the accident was due to
the negligence of the deceased himself. The driver of
the offending vehicle did not possess valid driving
licence as on the date of the accident. The liability is
subject to terms and conditions of the policy. It was
further pleaded that the quantum of compensation
claimed by the claimants is exorbitant. Hence, he
sought for dismissal of the petition.
The respondent No.2 did not appear before the
Tribunal inspite of service of notice and hence was
placed ex-parte.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,
the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter
recorded the evidence. The claimants, in order to
prove their case, examined claimant No.1 as PW-1
and another witness as PW-2 and got exhibited
documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P17. On behalf of
respondents, neither any witness was examined nor
got exhibited documents. The Claims Tribunal, by the
impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident
took place on account of rash and negligent driving of
the offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of
which, the deceased sustained injuries and succumbed
to the injuries. The Tribunal further held that the
claimants are entitled to a compensation of
Rs.10,74,000/- along with interest at the rate of 8%
p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest. Being
aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimants has
raised the following contentions:
Firstly, the claimants claim that the deceased, at
the time of the accident was earning Rs.25,000/- per
month by working as a Manager at Manath Garments.
They have produced the salary certificate as Ex.P10
and the employer has been examined as PW-2. But
the Tribunal disbelieved the case of the claimants and
has considered the monthly income of the deceased
as only Rs.9,500/-.
Secondly, the overall compensation awarded by
the Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, he prays for
allowing the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for
the Insurance Company has raised the following
contentions:
Firstly, even though the claimants claim that the
deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month,
produced the salary certificate and also examined the
employer but they have not produced the bank
statement to prove the income of the deceased.
Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the
income of the deceased notionally.
Secondly, since the claimants have not
established the income of the deceased, they are not
entitled for compensation towards 'future prospects'.
Thirdly, on appreciation of oral and documentary
evidence, the Tribunal has awarded just and
reasonable compensation.
Fourthly, in view of the Division Bench decision
of this Court in the case of MS.JOYEETA BOSE AND
OTHERS vs. VENKATESHAN.V AND OTHERS (MFA
5896/2018 and connected matters disposed of
on 24.8.2020), the interest granted by the Tribunal
at the rate of 8% p.a. is on the higher side. Hence,
he prays for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the judgment and award.
9. 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.
Even though the claimants have claimed that
deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month,
produced the salary certificate and also examined the
employer, they have not produced the bank statement
to prove the same. Therefore, the notional income
has to be assessed as per the guidelines issued by the
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Since the
accident has taken place in the year 2019, the
notional income has to be taken at Rs.14,000/- p.m.
To the aforesaid amount, 10% 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 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. -v- PRANAY
SETHI AND OTHERS reported in AIR 2017 SC
5157, Thus, the monthly income comes to
Rs.15,400/-, out of which, it is appropriate to deduct
1/3rd towards personal expenses and therefore, the
monthly income comes to Rs.10,267/-. The deceased
was aged about 51 years at the time of the accident
and multiplier applicable to his age group is '11'.
Thus, the claimants are entitled to compensation of
Rs.13,55,244/- (Rs.10,267*12*11) on account of 'loss
of dependency'.
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'.
In view of the law laid down by the Supreme
Court in MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. -
V- NANU RAM reported in 2018 ACJ 2782,the
claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/-
each under the head of 'loss of love and affection and
consortium'.
10. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the
following compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 13,55,244
Funeral expenses 15,000
Loss of estate 15,000
Loss of spousal 40,000
consortium
Loss of Parental 40,000
consortium
Loss of Filial consortium 40,000
Total 15,05,244
The claimants are entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.15,05,244/-.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest from the
date of filing of the claim petition till the date of
realization, within a period of six weeks from the date
of receipt of copy of this judgment. The enhanced
compensation carries interest @ 6% p.a.
To the aforesaid extent, the judgment of the
Claims Tribunal is modified.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Cm/-
