Karnataka High Court
Shri.Shahede W/O Madarsab vs Shri.G.E.Gangadhar S/O ... on 12 January, 2022
Bench: S G Pandit, Anant Ramanath Hegde
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
MFA NO.101690 OF 2020 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SHAHEDE W/O MADARSAB @ MADARASHEB
@ NADAF @ MAIDEN, NAME:KUMARI SHAEDA
D/O MOULASAHEB GARAGAD, AGE:34 YEARS,
OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,R/O # 296,
BASAVESHWAR ASHRAYA NAGAR,
DEVALAPUR ROAD AT, TQ:BAILHONGAL,
DIST:BELAGAVI.
2. KUMARI HUSANA PARVEEN D/O MADARASAB
MADARSAB @ MADARASHEB NADAF,
AGE:8 YEARS, 296 BASAVESHWAR NAGAR,
ASHRAYA NAGAR, DEVALAPUR ROAD,
AT TQ:BAILHONGAL, DIST:BELAGAVI.
3. MASTER AHAD S/O MADARSAB MADARSAB @
MADARSHEB NADAF, AGE:4 YEARS,
296, BASAVESHWAR ASHRAYA NAGAR, DEVALAPUR
ROAD, AT TQ:BAILHONGAL, DIST:BELAGAVI.
(SINCE APPELLANTS 2 AND 3 MINORS REP. BY
NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER APPELLANT NO.1)
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. UMESH C AINAPUR, ADVOCATE)
2
AND
1. SHRI. G.E. GANGADHAR S/O ISWHARAPP
AGE:MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS,
R/O ASST. DIRECTOR, LAND ARMY,
B.C. NO.21 FORT BELAGAVI-590001.
AND ALSO AT SERV NO.16, PIPELINE ROAD,
LAXMITEK, RMLI GANESHPUR CITY,
BELAGAVI-590009, KARNATAKA STATE.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI.
3. SHRI. BASAVANT ANNAPPA ARAVALLI
AGE:MAJOR, OCC:PRIVATE SERVICE,
R/O MALABANNAVAR ONI, BEVINKOPPA,
TQ:BAILHONGAL, DIST:BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GEETA K.M. @ PAWAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
(SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S ARANI, ADV. FOR R2) (R3-SERVED)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS
APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
23.12.2019 PASSED BY THE X ADDL. DISTRICT AND
MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, BELAGAVI IN MVC NO.664/2019 AND
GRANT THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED BY THE
APPELLANTS, HEREIN IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY ANY OTHER RELIEFS MAY KINDLY BE GRANTED.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
S.G. PANDIT J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for admission, it is taken
up for final disposal, with the consent of learned counsel
for both the parties.
2. The appellants/claimants are before this Court
praying for enhancement of compensation, not being
satisfied with the compensation awarded under judgment
and award dated 23.12.2019 passed in MVC No.664/2019
on the file of the learned X Addl. District and Sessions
Judge and Member, Addl. MACT, Belagavi (for short,
'Tribunal').
3. The claimants, who are the wife and minor
children of the deceased Madarasab @ Madarashaeb filed a
claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,
1988 seeking compensation for the accidental death of
deceased Madarasab, which took place on 11.03.2019
involving motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-24/X-
4265 and Car bearing registration No.KA-22/N-8019. The
accident and accidental death of deceased Madarasab are
not in dispute in this appeal.
4. Sri. Umesh C Ainapur, learned counsel for the
appellants/claimants would submit that the income of the
deceased assessed at Rs.10,000/- per month is on the
lower side and the Tribunal ought to have assessed the
income of the deceased at Rs.13,250/- per month taking
note of the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal
Services Authority (for short, 'KSLSA'). He further submits
that claimants 2 and 3 would be entitled to Rs.40,000/-
each towards parental consortium as held by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance
Company Ltd., Vs. Nanu Ram and Others, reported in
2018 ACJ 2782. Thus, he prays for allowing the appeal.
5. Per contra, Sri. Rajashekhar S Arani, learned
counsel appearing for respondent No.2-Insurance
Company supporting the impugned judgment and award
would submit that in the absence of any evidence to prove
the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has rightly
assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- per
month. He further submits that the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal is just and proper, which needs no
interference by this Court. Thus, he prays for dismissal of
the appeal.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for both the
parties and on perusal of the appeal papers, we are of the
view that the claimants are entitled for enhancement of
compensation as follows.
7. As stated above, there is no dispute with
regard to the accident and accidental death of deceased
Madarasab in the present appeal. The claimants are
before this Court praying for enhancement of
compensation. The income of the deceased assessed by
the Tribunal at Rs.10,000/- per month is on the lower side.
Admittedly, the accident is of the year 2019. Normally,
this Court and Lok Adalath, while settling the accidental
claims of the year 2019 would assess the income at
Rs.13,250/- per month, taking note of the chart prepared
by KSLSA based on various factors including the minimum
wage fixed. In the instant case also, in the absence of any
material evidence to establish the income, we are of the
opinion that it would be appropriate for us to determine
the income of the deceased at Rs.13,250/- p.m. taking
note of the income chart prepared by KSLSA. Accordingly,
the income of the deceased is taken at Rs.13,250/- p.m.
Age of the deceased, deduction of 1/3rd of the assessed
income of the deceased and multiplier of '15' and also
future prospects, taken by the Tribunal are not disputed
which are just and proper. Thus, the claimants would be
entitled for compensation on the head of loss of
dependency at Rs.22,26,000/- (Rs.13,250 + 40% x 2/3
x 12 x 15).
8. Further, 1st claimant being the wife of
deceased Madarasab is entitled for Rs.40,000/- towards
spousal consortium, whereas 2nd and 3rd claimants being
children of the deceased would be entitled for Rs.40,000/-
each towards parental consortium as held by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.
(supra). Thus, the claimants would be entitled for modified
compensation on the following heads:
Sl.No. Particulars Amount
1. Loss of dependency Rs.22,26,000/-
(Rs.13,250 + 40% x 2/3 x 12 x
15)
2. Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/-
3. Spousal Consortium Rs. 40,000/-
4. Parental Consortium (Rs.40,000 Rs. 80,000/-
each to claimants 2 and 3)
5. Transportation & funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/-
Total Rs.23,76,000/-
9. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to total
compensation of Rs.23,76,000/- as against
Rs.17,75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
10. Hence, we pass the following:
ORDER
a) The appeal is allowed in part.
b) The impugned judgment and award of
the Tribunal is modified to the extent
that the claimants are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.23,76,000/- as
against Rs.17,75,000/- awarded by
the Tribunal.
c) The enhanced compensation amount
will bear interest at the rate of 6% per
annum as awarded by the Tribunal,
from the date of claim petition till date
of realization.
d) The apportionment, deposit and
disbursement shall be made as per
the award of the Tribunal.
e) Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
JTR
