Karnataka High Court
Fatheema vs Carim Reddy Baqthavachala Reddy on 20 July, 2022
Bench: Anant Ramanath Hegde
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
M.F.A.NO.3705/2014(MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. FATHEEMA
W/O LATE KHADARPASHA
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
2. RESHMA @ HASEENA
D/O LATE KHADARPASHA
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
3. AYESHA
D/O LATE KHADARPASHA
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS
4. YARAB
S/O LATE KHADARPASHA
AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS
5. HYDER
S/O LATE KHADARPASHA
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS
6. RAMIZABI
MOTHER OF DECEASED KHADARPASHA
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS
APPELLANTS NO.3 TO 5 ARE MINORS
REPRESENTED BY 1ST APPELLANT/ NATURAL GUARDIAN
ALL ARE R/O HYDARI NAGAR
NEAR DARGA MOHALLA
2
MULBAGAL TOWN
KOLAR DISTRICT ... APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. NAZEEFA M. MULLA, ADV., FOR
SRI PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. CARIM REDDY BAQTHAVACHALA REDDY
S/O SHIVASHANKAR REDDY
AGE: MAJOR
H.NO.312, LITTLE ROCK APTS
MIYAPUR, HYDERABAD-500 001
ANDHRA PRADESH
2. M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
TATA PEBU DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR TIE-
UB BUSINESS, ROYAL INSURANCE BUILDING
II FLOOR, 14/J TATA ROAD
CHURCHGATTA
MUMBAI-400 038
MAHARASTRA STATE
REP: BY ITS MANAGER ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. MANJULA N. TEJASWI, ADV., FOR R.2
NOTICE TO R.1 DISPENSED WITH VIDE
ORDER DATED 03.09.2015.)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 10.03.2014 PASSED BY THE
II ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE & MACT AT KOLAR IN MVC
NO.95/2013 PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-
claimants and the learned Counsel appearing for the
respondent -insurer.
2. In-terms of the judgment and award dated
10.03.2014 in MVC No.95/2013 the Tribunal allowed the
petition in part and awarded compensation of Rs.8,23,000/-
along with interest & 6% per annum to the claimants. The
claimants claim compensation on account of the death of
Khadar pasha S/o Imam Sab @ Lalbaisab.
3. For the purpose of convenience, the parties will be
referred to as per their rank before this Tribunal.
4. Claimant No.1 is the wife, claimants Nos.2 to 5 are
the children and claimant No.6 is the mother of the deceased.
The accident is not in dispute and death is also not in dispute.
The proof of income as claimed by the claimants is not
established. In the absence of proof, the Tribunal has taken
the income at Rs.6,000/- per month and based on that loss of
dependency is calculated. The claimants being dissatisfied with
the compensation awarded are seeking enhancement.
5. In the absence of any proof regarding income, this
Court would go by the chart prepared by the Karnataka State
legal Services Authority to determine the notional income. The
accident occurred in the year 2013 and notional income would
be Rs.8,000/-. Following the ratio laid down by the National
Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi [2017] 16 SCC 680] 40%
is to be added towards future prospects, in that event the
notional income would be Rs.11,200/-.
6. The Tribunal has given a finding that the deceased
was aged 35 years. This finding is based on the postmortem
report.
7. Learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.2
would submit that the finding on the age of the deceased is
erroneous and that fact can be demonstrated by the age of
the claimants shown in their claim petition itself.
8. In the claim petition the age of the wife is shown
as 32 years and age of the younger daughter of the deceased
is 18 years. The age of the deceased is claimed as 35 years. If
it is accepted, then it is as good as holding that the deceased
was married at the age of 16 years and age of the claimant
No.1 - his wife at the time of marriage was 13. This Court is
unable to accept that the deceased was aged 35 years at the
time of accident.
9. Under the circumstances the Court is of the
opinion that the age of the deceased must be between 36-40.
In that event 15 and not 16 is the multiplier to be applied by
the Tribunal and applying 15 multiplier loss of dependency
have to be re-determined. Therefore, the compensation under
the head of 'loss of dependency' would be Rs.11,200/-x 12x
15x ¾ which comes to Rs.15,12,000/-.
10. Learned Counsel for the claimants/appellants
would submit that the compensation awarded under the head
of loss of consortium, love & affection and under the head
funeral expenses is on lower side. This Court has considered
the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the
claimants.
11. Learned Counsel for the claimants would urge to
award compensation following the ratio laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in 'Magma General Insurance Co., Ltd and
Pranay Sethi case referred to supra.
12. Learned Counsel for the Insurer would submit that
except claimant No.1, other claimants are not entitled to
compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head of 'loss of
consortium'.
13. This Court is consistently following the ratio laid
down in the case of 'Magma General Insurance Co., Ltd and
Pranay Sethi cases referred to supra to award the
compensation under the head of loss of consortium in favour
of the wife, children and the parents. Hence under the head of
'loss of consortium', compensation of Rs.40,000/- to each of
the claimants is awarded.
14. So far as 'Funeral expenses' and 'loss of estate' is
concerned, claimant No.1 is entitled to Rs.15,000/- under
each of the heads. Thus the claimants are entitled for the
compensation as under:
Sl. Head of compensation Amount in
No. Rs.
1 Loss of dependency 15,12,000/-
2 Loss of consortium 2,40,000/-
(40,000 x 6)
3 Loss of estate 15,000/-
4 Loss of funeral expenses 15,000/-
5 Total 17,82,000/-
Less-awarded by the 8,23,000/-
Tribunal
Enhanced compensation 9,59,000/-
15. Hence the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated
10.03.2014 passed by the II Addl. District Judge & Motor
Accidents Claim Tribunal, Kolar in M.V.C.No.95/2013 is
modified.
(iii) The claimants are entitled to compensation of
Rs.17,82,000/- as against Rs.8,23,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the
claim petition till the date of payment. Enhanced
compensation is Rs.9,59,000/-.
(iv) 50% of enhanced compensation shall be kept in
fixed deposit in the name of the claimants for a period of three
years in any nationalized bank. Remaining 50% of the
enhanced compensation shall be released in favour of the
claimants.
(v) Insurance Company shall deposit the
compensation awarded with interest after deducting the
amount, if any, already paid.
(vi) The entire amount in deposit be transmitted to the
jurisdictional Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
PKN
