Karnataka High Court
Veeramma vs Shubhangi Langde on 8 December, 2021
Bench: H T Prasad
1
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.5090 OF 2019(MV)
BETWEEN:
1. VEERAMMA
W/O RAMAKRISHNA
NOW AGED ABOIUT 31 YEARS
2. RAVIKUMAR
S/O RAMAKRISHNA
NOW AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
3. SAMPATH
S/O RAMAKRISHNA
NOW AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
4. MAKUDIKE ERAPPA
S/O DODDALAKSHMAPPA
NOW AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS
ALL ARE R/O HONNURU VILLAGE
DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.RANGE GOWDA N. R., ADV.)
2
AND
1. SHUBHANGI LANGDE
W/O CHANDRAKANTH
AGED MAJOR
R/O 1/18, SUBHASH NAGAR,
YERWADA, NEW KARKI, PUNE,
MAHARASHTRA STATE.
2. THE LEGAL CLAIMS MANAGER
UNIVESAL SOMPO GIC, 3RD FLOOR,
KVV SAMRAT, 217/A, 3RD MAIN,
OUTER RING ROAD, KASTURI NAGAR,
BANGALORE 560 043.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.H. N. KESHAVA PRASHANTH, ADV. FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 8.12.2021
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
01.01.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.231/2018 ON THE
FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
MEMBER, MACT-IV, DAVANGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE 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 1.1.2019 passed by
the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal-IV, Davanagere in MVC 231/2018.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 22.8.2017 the deceased
Ramakrishna was waiting for bus on extreme left side
of the road at Honnuru Gollarahatti, on NH-4 road, at
that time, a swift car bearing registration No.MH-12-
KJ-4678 which was being driven in a rash and
negligent manner, dashed against the deceased. As a
result of the aforesaid accident, the deceased
sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the
injuries.
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 respondents
appeared through counsel and only respondent No.2
filed written statement in which the averments made
in the petition were 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
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. The age,
occupation and income of the deceased are denied. It
was further pleaded that the quantum of
compensation claimed by the claimants is exorbitant.
Hence, he sought for dismissal of the petition.
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 got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P12.
On behalf of respondents, no witness was examined
and got exhibited documents namely Ex.R1. 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.12,04,000/- 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
was aged about 45 years at the time of the accident
and he was earning Rs.20,000/- per month by doing
coolie work. But the Tribunal is not justified in taking
the monthly income of the deceased as merely as
Rs.9,000/-.
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], in case the deceased
was self-employed or on a fixed salary, an addition of
25% of the established income towards 'future
prospects' should be the warrant where the deceased
was between the age group of 40-50 years. The same
may be considered.
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 of Rs.40,000/- 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.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for
the Insurance Company has raised the following
counter-contentions:
Firstly, even though the claimants claim that the
deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, the
same is not established by the claimants by producing
documents. 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, the interest awarded by the Tribunal at
8% p.a. on the compensation amount is on the higher
side. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the records.
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.
The claimants claim that deceased was earning
Rs.20,000/- per month. But they have not produced
any documents to prove the income of the deceased.
In the absence of proof of income, the notional income
has to be assessed. As per the guidelines issued by
the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, for the
accident taken place in the year 2017, the notional
income of the deceased has to be taken at
Rs.11,000/- p.m.
To the aforesaid income, 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.13,750/-. Out of which, it is
appropriate to deduct 1/4th of the income of the
deceased towards personal expenses, since there are
4 dependents and remaining amount has to be taken
as his contribution to the family. The deceased was
aged about 45 years at the time of the accident and
multiplier applicable to his age group is '14'. Thus,
the claimants are entitled to compensation of
Rs.17,32,500/- (Rs.13,750*12*14*3/4) 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'.
Claimant No.1, wife of the deceased is entitled for
compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head of 'loss
of spousal consortium'.
In view of the law laid down by the Supreme
Court in the case of 'MAGMA GENERAL
INSURANCE' (supra), claimant Nos.2 and 3, children
of the deceased are entitled for compensation of
Rs.40,000/- each under the head of 'loss of parental
consortium' and claimant No.4, father of the deceased
are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- under
the head 'loss of filial consortium' .
10. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the
following compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 17,32,500
Funeral expenses 15,000
Loss of estate 15,000
Loss of spousal consortium 40,000
Loss of Parental 80,000
consortium
Loss of Filial consortium 40,000
Total 19,22,500
11. In the result, the appeal is allowed in
part. The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
The claimants are entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.19,22,500/-.
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 amount shall carry
interest at 6% p.a.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DM
