Karnataka High Court
Ramachandra vs Mahesha on 6 January, 2021
Author: S.Sujatha And M.I.Arun
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
MFA NO.424 of 2019 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. RAMACHANDRA
S/O RAMASHETTY
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
2. RAJAMMA
W/O RAMACHANDRA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/AT HINDITHAVALLI
VILLAGE, KELLUR POST
RAVANDUR HOBLI, PERIYAPATNA
TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SYED ABDUL SABOOR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MAHESHA
S/O DORESWAMY
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
R/AT 244, 6TH MAIN
SBI MAIN ROAD
HEBBAL, 1ST STAGE
MYSURU, MYSURU DISTRICT
2. SUNIL MASCARENHAS
S/O LIGOURY MASCARNEHAS
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
2
R/AT 5-2-73, A/12, GRADE
1ST CROSS, KOLMBE, UDUPI
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
ABOVE STATE BANK OF MYSORE
KRISHNAMURTHYPURAM
BALLAL CIRCLE, MYSURU - 570 004
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. V. HEGDE MULKHAND, ADV. FOR R3;
NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 21.08.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.954/2016
ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE, ADDITIONAL COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, MYSURU AS A PRESIDING OFFICER, MACT,
MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
M.I.ARUN J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the judgment and award dated
21.08.2018 passed in MVC No.954/2016 by the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mysuru (for short 'the
Tribunal'), the petitioners therein have preferred this
appeal.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
That on 08.07.2016, at about 1.45 p.m., the son of
the petitioners by name H.R.Gopala as a pillion rider
along with his relative was proceeding towards Mysuru
in order to attend their masonry work on a motorbike
bearing registration No.KA-42/U-3592. When they
reached Indian Oil petrol bunk at Yelavala on Mysuru
Hunsur main road, a Car bearing registration No.KA-02/
MA-9368 being driven by respondent no.1 in a rash and
negligent manner dashed against their motorbike. Due
to the said accident, the said H.R.Gopala sustained
severe injuries and succumbed to the same.
4. Respondent no.1 is the driver of the Car,
respondent no.2 is the owner and respondent no.3 is the
insurer of the offending vehicle.
5. After service of notice, respondent nos.1 and 3
have appeared through their respective counsel, filed
their objections and have contested the petition before
the Tribunal. They have denied their liability and sought
for dismissal of the claim petition. Respondent no.2 was
placed ex parte.
6. The petitioners, to prove the case, examined one
witness and got marked Exs.P1 to P10. The
respondents did not examine any witness but got
marked the insurance policy as Ex.R1.
7. Based on the pleadings and the evidence let in, the
Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.14,30,800/-
along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition
till realization in favour of the petitioners. Not satisfied
by the same, the petitioners have preferred this appeal.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
9. The case of the petitioners is that the
compensation that has been awarded by the Tribunal
under different heads is on the lower side and has
sought for enhancement of compensation.
10. Per contra, respondent no.3 has justified the order
passed by the Tribunal and has sought for dismissal of
the appeal.
11. The factum of accident, negligence on the part of
the driver of the offending Car and the death of the son
of the petitioners is not in dispute. The only question
that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is justified and
reasonable?
12. The accident happened in the year 2016. At the
time of the accident, the deceased was aged 23 years.
Though it is claimed that the deceased was earning
Rs.15,000/- per month at the time of the accident, no
materials have been produced to show his income. The
Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the
deceased at Rs.9,000/-. We find the same to be on the
lower side. As per the chart prepared by the Karnataka
State Legal Services Authority in consultation with the
Insurance Companies, the notional income in the
absence of proof of income for the year 2016 is fixed at
Rs.9,500/- per month. Given the age of the deceased
as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi
(2017) 16 SCC 680, 40% has to be added towards
future prospects. As the deceased was a Bachelor, 50%
of the income has to be deducted towards his personal
expenses. Given his age, a multiplier of 18 has to be
adopted. Thus, on the count of loss of dependency, the
petitioners are entitled to a sum of Rs.14,36,400/-
[Rs.9,500/- + 40% X 12 X 18 X 1/2].
13. The petitioners being parents of the deceased, as
per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
New India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Somwati [(2020)9
SCC 644], they are entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/-
each towards loss of consortium. Thus, they are totally
entitled to Rs.80,000/- towards loss of consortium.
14. The petitioners are also entitled to a sum of
Rs.30,000/- towards loss of estate and funeral
expenses. Thus, in all, the petitioners are entitled to a
sum of Rs.15,46,400/- as against Rs.14,30,800/-
awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation
shall carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition
till its realization.
15. Hence, the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part.
ii) The total compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is modified and enhanced to
Rs.15,46,400/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs
Forty Six Thousand and Four Hundred
Only) as against Rs.14,30,800/- with
interest at the rate of 6% per annum on
the enhanced compensation from the date
of the claim petition till its realization.
iii) The insurance company shall deposit the
amount determined as aforesaid before
the Tribunal within 90 days from the date
of receipt of the certified copy of the
judgment and order.
iv) The portion of the order of the Tribunal
inasmuch as liability, apportionment and
disbursement remains intact.
v) The modified compensation amount shall
be apportioned and disbursed in terms of
the order of the Tribunal.
vi) Draw modified award accordingly.
vii) All pending I.As. stand disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
hkh.
