Karnataka High Court
Sri. Vedamurthy vs Sri. Sathyanarayana on 13 January, 2021
Author: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No. 5076 OF 2016(MV)
BETWEEN:
1. Sri. Vedamurthy,
S/o Late Chandrappa,
Aged about 49 years.
2. Minor Tanushree,
D/o Vedamurthy,
Aged about 11 years.
3. Minor Rashmitha,
D/o Vedamurthy,
Aged abut 8 years.
4. Danshu Patel,
S/o Vedamurthy,
Aged about 06 years,
Appellants No.2 to 4
Represented by their
Father and natural guardian
Appellant No.1.
All are r/at
Devaranasipura,
2
Bhadravathi Taluk,
Shivamogga District. ... Appellants
(By Sri.K.Prasanna Shetty., Advocate)
AND:
1. Sri. Sathyanarayana,
S/o Hanumantha Rao,
Aged about 36 years,
R/at No.97, Lower Hutha,
Bhadravathi-577301.
2. The Commissioner,
City Municipality,
Old Town, Bhadravathi-577301.
3. Karnataka Government
Insurance Department,
Motor Branch,
Bangalore-560 001. ... Respondents
(By Sri.H.K. Basavaraj, AGA., for R2 & R3)
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act,
against the Judgment and Award dated:08.06.2016
passed in MVC No.141/2015 on the file of the
Additional Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Additional MACT-
12, Bhadravathi, partly allowing the claim petition for
compensation and seeking enhancement of
compensation.
This MFA, coming on for hearing, through video
conference, this day, this Court, delivered the
following:
3
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging
the judgment and award dated 08.06.2016 passed by
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhadravathi in
MVC No.141/2015 whereby Tribunal has granted a
compensation of Rs.4,51,000/- with interest at 6%
p.a. and directed the insurance company to pay the
compensation.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on
28.10.2014 at about 5.00 p.m., deceased Shashikala
was proceeding as a pillion rider from Kodihalli
towards Devaranarasipura in the motorcycle bearing
registration No.KA-14/R-4567. At that time, a lorry
bearing registration No.KA-14/B-0693 came at a high
speed, in a rash and negligent manner, dashed
against the motorcycle. Due to the impact, the said
Shashikala sustained grievous injuries and succumbed
to the injuries at the spot. The legal representatives of
the deceased have filed a claim petition in MVC
No.141/2015.
3. In response to the notice issued, respondents
appeared through advocates and filed written
statement. In addition, it is contended by the
respondent - insurance company that the claim
petition filed by the claimants is not maintainable and
they are not entitled for compensation. It was
pleaded that the rider of the motorcycle was at fault in
causing the accident and in order to escape from the
liability has foisted a false complaint against the
offending vehicle.
4. On the basis of the rival pleadings, the
Tribunal framed the following issues for its
consideration:-
" 1. Whether the petitioners prove that on
28.10.2014 at about 5.00 p.m. near
Kodihalli Mahesh House when Shashikala
was moving as pillion rider on TVS
motorcycle bearing No.KA-154/R-4567, the
1st respondent being the driver of lorry
bearing No.K?A-14/B-06793 came from
Devaranarasipura towards Bhadravathi in a
rash and negligent manner with high speed
and dashed the bike of Shashikala and due
to the impact she died?
2. Whether the petitioners prove that they
are the legal heirs of deceased Shashikala?
3. Whether the petitioners are entitled
for compensation as sought?
4. What order or award?"
5. In support of their case, the claimants
examined the husband of the deceased as PW-1 and
they have produced 20 documents as Exs.P-1 to 20.
The respondents have not examined any witnesses
but produced 3 documents as Exs.R1 to R3.
6. On the basis of the said evidence, the
Tribunal answered the aforesaid issues in the following
manner:
Issue No.1 : Affirmative
Issue No.2: Partly affirmative
Issue No.3: Partly affirmative.
Issue No.4: As per final order.
7. The Tribunal by judgment and award dated
08.06.2016 awarded the compensation of
Rs.4,51,000/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.
Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the
claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of
compensation.
8. The learned counsel for the claimants has
raised the following contentions:
Firstly, the claimants claim that the deceased
was earning Rs.10,500/- per month by doing
agriculture work. But the Tribunal is not justified in
taking the monthly income of the deceased as only
Rs.3,000/-. To prove the income she has produced
Ex.P13 - certificate for supply of milk and Ex.P20 -
Sericulturists Pass Book.
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], the claimants are
entitled for addition of future prospects.
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 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.
9. Per contra, the learned Additional
Government Advocate for the Insurance Company has
raised the following counter-contentions:
Firstly, even though the claimants have
produced the documents at Exs.P13 and P20, they
have not examined the author of the said documents.
Since the deceased was a house wife the Tribunal has
rightly assessed the monthly income of the claimant
as Rs.3,000/- per month.
Secondly, on appreciation of oral and
documentary evidence, the Tribunal has awarded just
and reasonable compensation. Hence, he prays for
dismissal of the appeal.
10. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Perused the judgment and award and the original
records.
11. 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 Tribunal after considering the materials on record
has rightly assessed the income of the deceased as
Rs.3,000/- per month. Since the deceased was aged
about 42 years, to the aforesaid amount, 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.3,750/-, out of
which, we deem it appropriate to deduct 1/3rd towards
personal expenses and therefore, the monthly income
comes to Rs.2,500/-. The deceased was aged about
42 years at the time of the accident and multiplier
applicable to her age group is '14'. Thus, the
claimants are entitled to compensation of
Rs.4,20,000/- (Rs.2,500*12*14) on account of 'loss of
dependency'.
In view of the law laid down by the Supreme
Court in 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE', claimant
No.1, husband of the deceased is entitled for
compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head of 'loss
of spousal consortium', claimant Nos.2 to 4, children
are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- each
under the head of 'loss of parental consortium'.
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'.
12. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the
following compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 4,20,000
Funeral expenses 15,000
Loss of estate 15,000
Loss of spousal 40,000
consortium
Loss of Parental 1,20,000
consortium
Total 6,10,000
The claimants are entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.6,10,000/-. The respondent No.3
- Karnataka Government Insurance Company is
directed to deposit the compensation amount along
with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till
the date of realization, within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
To the aforesaid extent, the judgment of the
Claims Tribunal is modified.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Cm/-
