K.Krishna Murthy S/O Late ... vs Ramachandra @ Chandrashekar
2022 Latest Caselaw 1455 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1455 Kant
Judgement Date : 1 February, 2022

Karnataka High Court

K.Krishna Murthy S/O Late ... vs Ramachandra @ Chandrashekar on 1 February, 2022

Bench: S G Pandit, Anant Ramanath Hegde

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                    DHARWAD BENCH

        DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                         PRESENT

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT
                           AND
     THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

               M.F.A. No. 100966/2019 (MV)
BETWEEN:

K. KRISHNA MURTHY S/O LATE ANJINAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/O 1/1,
BEHIND CHANDRAMMA HOTEL, KUDITHINI VILLAGE,
BALLARI TALUK & DISTRICT-583 101.
                                        -   APPELLANT
(BY SRI. Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     RAMACHANDRA @ CHANDRASHEKAR,
       S/O RAMALINGA U, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
       DRIVER OF THE MOTORCYCLE BEARING
       NO.KA-34/EE-1109, R/O KUDITHINI VILLAGE,
       BALLARI TALUK & DISTRICT-583 101.

2.     SHANKARAPPA K S/O K. RUDRAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OWNER OF THE MOTORCYCLE
       BEARING NO.KA-34/EE-11-0, R/O WARD NO. 5,
       BELGERI TEMPLE, KUDITHINI VILLAGE,
       BALLARI TALUK & DISTRICT-583 101.

3.    THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
      M/S ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY
      LIMITED, BALLARI-583 101.
                                       -     RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.Y. KATAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R3,
NOTICE TO R1 & R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)
                              2



     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTIKON 173(1) OF M.V. ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 03.09.2018 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO. 1177/2016
BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT NO. XI,
BALLARI & ETC.

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION THIS DAY, S.G. PANDIT J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                       JUDGMENT

Appellant-father of the deceased Santosh Kumar

Yadav, is in appeal not being satisfied with the quantum of

compensation awarded in the judgment and award passed

by the learned II Addl. Sr. Civil Judge, Ballari cum

Member, MACT-XI, Ballari in M.V.C. No. 1177/2016 dated

03.09.2018.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the appeal papers.

3. The accident that occurred on 09.04.2016 involving

motorcycle bearing No. KA-34/EE-1109 and the death of

Santosh Kumar Yadav is not disputed in this appeal. The

insurer has accepted the judgment and award. The

claimant is in appeal before this Court praying for

enhancement of compensation.

4. The Tribunal based on the material on record

awarded total compensation of `10,22,000/- with interest

at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date

of deposit. While awarding the compensation, the Tribunal

assessed income of the deceased at `9,000/- per month,

deducted 50% towards personal expenses and adopted

multiplier of 18 since the deceased was aged 23 years.

The income assessed by the Tribunal, deduction towards

personal expenses and multiplier of 18 is not in dispute in

this appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the

Tribunal failed to award any compensation on the head of

future prospects. It is submitted that the claimant would

be entitled to 40% of the assessed income towards future

prospects in view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble

Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company

Limited V. Pranay Sethi and Others (AIR 2017 SC

5157). Thus, he prays for enhancement of compensation.

6. Learned counsel Sri M.Y. Katagi appearing for the

respondent No.3-insurer justifies the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal and sought for dismissal of the

appeal.

7. On going through the appeal papers it is evident that

deceased was aged 23 years as on the date of accident.

The Hon'ble Apex Court in Pranay Sethi supra has made

it clear that wherever the deceased aged less than 40

years, the claimant/s would be entitled for addition of 40%

of the assessed income towards future prospects. The

instant case also falls under the same category. Hence,

the claimant-appellant is entitled for the said benefit.

8. In addition to the above, the claimant-appellant

would be entitled for filial consortium of `40,000/-;

towards loss of estate a sum of `15,000/- and another sum

of `15,000/- towards transportation of dead body and

funeral expenses. Thus, the claimant would be entitled for

`70,000/- under conventional heads. Since the

compensation on the head of filial consortium is granted,

the claimant would not be entitled for compensation

towards loss of love and affection, which the Tribunal has

granted. Thus, the re-assessed compensation is as under:

Sl. No.    Particulars                     Amount `
1.         Towards loss of dependency        13,60,000.00
           (`9,000/- + `3,600/- less 50% =
           `6,300/- x 12 x 18)
2.         Filial consortium                    40,000.00
3.         Loss of estate                       15,000.00
4.         Transportation of dead body and      15,000.00
           funeral expenses
           Total                             14,20,800.00

For the foregoing reasons, we pass the following

order.

ORDER

Appeal filed by the claimant-appellant is allowed in

part. The judgment and award passed by the learned II

Addl. Sr. Civil Judge, Ballari cum Member, MACT-XI, Ballari

in M.V.C. No. 1177/2016 dated 03.09.2018, is modified to

the extent that the claimant is entitled for a total

compensation of `14,20,800/- as against `10,22,000/-

awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. from the

date of petition till realization. The order of apportionment

and deposit of the compensation amount shall remain in