Smt. M. Lakshmi W/O Late M. ... vs Vinayaga Murthya, S/O Vediyappam
2022 Latest Caselaw 1643 Kant

                                                 MFA 103675/2017

                              -1-




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

      DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022

                           BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

                  M.F.A.No.103675/2017

BETWEEN:

1.   Smt. M.Lakshmi,
     W/o late M.Venkatesh @ Venkateshulu,
     Age: 32 years, Occ: Housewife.

2.   Minor M.Shruthi,
     D/o late M.Venkatesh @ Venkateshulu,
     Age: 12 years, Occ: Student.

3.   Minor Jayashree,
     D/o late M.Venkatesh @ Venkateshulu,
     Age: 9 years, Occ: Student.

4.   M.Sravahthi,
     D/o late M.Venkatesh @ Venkateshulu,
     Age: 5 years, Occ: Student.

5.   M.Hanumantha Reddy,
     S/o late M.Venkatareddy @ Venkatesh,
     Age: 71 years.

6.   Smt. M.Ulemma,
     W/o M.Hanumantha Reddy,
     Age: 66 years.

     Appellants 2 to 4 are minors,
     Represented by their guardian
     and natural mother appellant no.1.

     All are residents of Jajarakallu village,
     D.Hirehal Mandal, Rayadurga Taluka
                                               MFA 103675/2017

                               -2-




       of Ananthapur District, A.P.,
       presently residing at Guggarahatti,
       Ballari - 583 102.                  ..APPELLANTS

(By Miss Soubhagya Vakkund, Adv., for
    Sri Y.Lakshmikant Reddy & Smt. Y.Malathi Reddy, Advs.)

AND:

1.     Vinayaga Murthy,
       S/o Vediyappam,
       Age: 41 years,
       Occ: Driver of the lorry
       bearing No.TN.29/AK.9943,
       R/o Manjimaid village in
       Pochaballi Taluka of
       Krishnagiri,
       Tamilnadu State - 782 910.

2.     Tathnam.K.,
       S/o Krishnan,
       Age: 42 years,
       R/o No.64, Uchampatti village,
       Thindal post, Palacode Taluka of
       Dharmapuri - 640 182.

3.     The Manager,
       HDFC ERGO General Insurance
       Company Limited, No.25/1,
       2nd Floor, Building No.2,
       Shankaranarayana Building,
       M.G.Road, Bengaluru - 560 001.       ..RESPONDENTS

(By Sri Nagaraj C.Kolloori, Adv. for R-3;
    Notice to R-1 & R-2 dispensed with)

      This miscellaneous first appeal is filed under Section
173(1) of the MV act, against the judgment and award dated
01.08.2016 passed in MVC No.718/2015 on the file of the
Member, MACT-XII, Ballari, partly allowing the claim petition
for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.
                                             MFA 103675/2017

                               -3-




       This appeal coming on for Admission, this day the Court
delivered the following:-

                        JUDGMENT

1. The claimants have preferred this appeal being not

satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by

the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-XII, Ballari, in

M.V.C.No.718/2015 vide its judgment and award dated

01.08.2016.

2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the

consent of the learned Counsel for both sides, the same is

taken up for final disposal.

3. For the sake of convenience, the parties to this

appeal are referred to by their rankings assigned to them

before the Tribunal.

4. Brief facts of the case that would be relevant for the

purpose of disposal of this appeal are, the claimants who

are the wife, minor children and parents of deceased

M.Venkatesh @ Venkateshulu, had filed claim petition

under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, MFA 103675/2017

claiming compensation of `25,00,000/- from the driver,

owner and insurer of the offending lorry bearing

registration No.TN-29/AK-9943 on account of the death of

M.Venkatesh in the road traffic accident that had taken

place on 29.06.2015.

5. It is the case of the claimants that on 29.06.2015,

Venkatesh was proceeding in his motor cycle bearing

registration No.AP-02/0992 from Mechiri village towards

Jajarakallu village and at about 7.30 p.m., when the said

motor cycle reached near Bommakkanahally, the

offending lorry bearing registration No.TN-29/AK-9943

which was driven in a rash and negligent manner by its

driver, dashed against the motor cycle from its rear side

and caused the accident. In the said accident, Venkatesh

had sustained grievous injuries. Though he was shifted to

VIMS Hospital, Ballari immediately, he succumbed to the

injuries on 03.07.2015. It is under these circumstances,

the claim petition is filed claiming compensation from the

respondents. The Tribunal has partly allowed the claim

petition and awarded compensation of `9,37,500/- with MFA 103675/2017

interest at 7% per annum from the date of petition till

realization and had saddled the liability on respondent

no.3-Insurer of the offending lorry. Being not satisfied

with the quantum of compensation awarded by the

Tribunal, the claimants are before this Court.

6. Learned Counsel for the claimants submits that the

accident is of the year 2015, and therefore, the notional

income of the deceased ought to have been taken at

`8,000/- per month. She submits that having regard to

the age of the deceased, 40% of his income ought to have

been taken towards loss of his future prospects. She also

submits that the compensation awarded to the claimants

under the conventional heads is also on the lower side,

and accordingly, prays to allow the appeal.

7. Per contra, learned Counsel for the Insurer has

argued in support of the judgment and award impugned

herein and has contended that the compensation awarded

is just and proper and needs no interference.

MFA 103675/2017

8. I have given my anxious consideration to the

arguments addressed on both sides and also perused the

material available on record.

9. The accident in question is not in dispute, so also

the involvement of the offending lorry bearing registration

No.TN-29/AK-9943 in the said accident which was duly

insured by respondent no.3-Insurer which was valid as on

the date of the accident. It is also not in dispute that

deceased Venkatesh who had sustained grievous injuries

in the said accident, had subsequently died in the

hospital on 03.07.2015 while he was undergoing

treatment for the injuries sustained by him in the

accident.

10. The deceased was aged about 38 years as on the

date of the accident and he was an agricultural coolie.

Having regard to the year of the accident, as per the

income chart maintained by the Karnataka State Legal

Services Authority for the purpose of disposal of road

traffic accident cases before the Lok Adalath, the notional MFA 103675/2017

income of the deceased ought to have been taken at

`8,000/- and having regard to the age of the deceased,

40% of his income ought to have been taken into

consideration towards loss of his future prospects. Out of

the total income, having regard to the number of

dependents, 1/4th of the same was required to be

deducted towards his personal expenses and multiplier of

'15' is required to be made applicable. In such an event,

the claimants would be entitled for a total sum of

`15,12,000/- towards of loss of dependency.

11. Towards loss of filial love and affection, the

claimants are entitled for a sum of `40,000/- each. In

addition to the same, they are also entitled for a sum of

`30,000/- towards of loss of estate and funeral expenses.

Therefore, under the conventional heads, the claimants

entitled for a sum of `2,70,000/-. In all, the claimants are

entitled for a total compensation of `17,82,000/- as

against the sum of `9,37,500/- awarded by the Tribunal.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part.

MFA 103675/2017

12. The enhanced amount of compensation shall carry

interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till

realization. Since the liability is not disputed, respondent

no.3-Insurer of the offending lorry shall deposit the

enhanced amount of compensation along with interest

within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the

certified copy of the judgment. The award passed by the

Tribunal in so far as it relates to apportionment, deposit

and disbursement, would be applicable even for the

enhanced amount of compensation.

13. In view of the order passed by this Court on IA-

1/2017 on 03.02.2022 while condoning the delay of 295

days, it is made clear that the claimants would not be

entitled for interest for the period of delay of 295 days in

filing the appeal.

Sd/-

JUDGE KK