Karnataka High Court
Smt. Rathnamma vs Smt. Bhagyamma on 16 December, 2021
Bench: P.S.Dinesh Kumar, P.Krishna Bhat
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8974 OF 2018
(MV-D)
BETWEEN :
1. SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O. LATE MUNIDYAVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
2. KUM. LAVANYA
D/O. LATE MUNIDYAVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
3. KUM. RANJITHA
D/O. LATE MUNIDYAVAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
4. SMT. CHANNAMMA
W/O. LATE CHIKKAMUNISONNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 79 YEARS,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
NARAYANAPURA VILLAGE,
VIJAYAPURA HOBLI AND POST,
DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI. DEVENDRA N, ADVOCATE)
2
AND :
1. SMT. BHAGYAMMA
W/O. BYREGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
R/AT YALUVANAHALLI VILLAGE,
1ST BLOCK, SOMESHWARNAGARA,
DODDAMARALLI POST,
NANDI POST,
CHIKKABALLAPURA TALUK AND DISTRICT.
2. BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED
R/O. AT NO.31,
TBR TOWERS,
1ST CROSS, NEW MISSION ROAD,
ADJACENT TO JAIN COLLEGE AND
BENGALURU STOCK EXCHANGE,
BENGALURU-560 027.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. A.N. KRISHNA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1-SERVED)
THIS MFA FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12/01/2018,
PASSED IN MVC NO.725/2014, ON THE FILE OF THE VTH
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
DEVANAHALLI, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS,
THIS DAY, P.S. DINESH KUMAR J, DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
3
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the claimants in
MVC.No.725/2014 on the file of V Additional District
and Sessions Judge, Devanahalli, seeking
enhancement of compensation awarded vide judgment
and award dated January 12, 2018, passed by the
Tribunal.
2. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be
referred as per their status before the Tribunal.
3. Heard Shri N.Devendra, learned advocate for
claimants-appellants and Shri A.N.Krishna Swamy,
learned advocate for second respondent-insurer.
4. First claimant's husband Shri Munidyavappa
sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident on
18.07.2014, when a car bearing No. KA-40-M-4686
coming from opposite side dashed against the motor
cycle, which he was riding. Shri.Munidyavappa
succumbed to the injuries in the hospital on
18.07.2014. On adjudication of the claim petition,
Tribunal has awarded Rs.7,58,000/-.
5. Learned advocate for the claimants submitted
that deceased was water man and agriculturist and
earning Rs.10,000/- per month. Learned Tribunal has
erred in considering the income of the deceased as
Rs.7,000/- p.m., and accordingly sought for
enhancement. He also submitted that age of the
deceased is recorded 48 years in the post mortem
report. Therefore, multiplier ought to have considered
accordingly.
6. Sri.Krishna Swamy for the insurer would not
dispute the fact that this Court has not been
considered Rs.8,500/- per month as notional income in
the year 2014. So far as his age is considered, he
submitted that the Driving Licence-Ex.P-22 shows that
his age is 53 years. Therefore, applicable multiplier
would be "11".
7. Shri Krishna Swamy is right in his submission
because Driving Licence is a valid document and it is
issued after verifying the records submitted by the
applicant. Therefore, we are persuaded to accept his
submission that the age of the deceased was 53 years.
8. Claimants have not produced any document
before the Tribunal to substantiate their claim that
Shri Munidyavappa was earning Rs.10,000/- per
month. In the absence of any proof of income, this
Court has consistently considered the notional income
of an able bodied person in the year 2014 as
Rs.8,500/- p.m and future prospects is to be added
at 10%.
9. First claimant is the wife, claimants No.2 and 3
are daughters and claimant No.4 is the mother of the
deceased. Hence, 1/4th is deductible from the
earnings of the deceased while calculating loss of
dependency.
10. Thus, compensation towards loss of dependency
is worked out as follows;
The monthly notional income works out to
Rs.9,350/- (Rs.8,500+850) [by adding 10% towards
future prospects (Rs.8,500*10%=Rs.850)].
After deducting 1/4th, it works out to Rs.7,012.5/- per
month (Rs.9,350*3/4). The Annual notional income
works out to Rs.84,150/- (Rs.7,012.5*12).
By applying 11 as multiplier, the loss of dependency
works out to Rs.9,25,650/- (Rs.84,150*11). 1051875
11. The compensation is re-computed as follows;
Sl.No Description Amount
a. Loss of dependency Rs.9,25,650
b. ADD: Rs.1,60,000
Consortium (Rs.40,000*4)
c. ADD: Conventional heads; Rs.30,000
funeral expenses, etc.,
d. Total (a+b+c) Rs.11,15,650
e. LESS: Compensation awarded Rs.7,58,000
by the Tribunal (d-e)
Enhanced Compensation Rs.3,57,650
12. Hence, the following;
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed in part by holding
that claimants are entitled for a total compensation
of Rs.11,15,650/-, as against Rs.7,58,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal, payable with interest at
6% p.a., from the date of filing claim petition till
the date of deposit. The enhanced compensation
is Rs.3,57,650/-; and
(ii) Insurer shall pay the entire compensation
amount of Rs.11,15,650/- with interest at 6% p.a.,
excluding 201 days of delay, excluding the amount
paid, if any, within eight weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. Disbursement shall
be made as directed by the Tribunal.
No costs.
<
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
RU
