Sri Muniraju G vs Rajesh V
2022 Latest Caselaw 9702 Kant

                           1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 27 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                        BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

     MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4114/2013 (MV)

BETWEEN:

1.     SRI. MUNIRAJU G
       S/O LATE GOVINDASWAMY,
       AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,

2.     SANGEETHA
       D/O LATE GOVINDASWAMY,
       AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,

3.     PAVITHRA
       D/O LATE GOVINDASWAMY,
       AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,

       ALL ARE R/AT
       A MUDDAMMA GARDEN,
       PSK NAIDU ROAD,
       DODDAKUNTE,
       COX TOWN,
       BANGALORE-560005.
                                       ... APPELLANTS

(BY SRI.PARAMESHWARAPPA , ADVOCATE )


AND:

1.     RAJESH V
       S/O VENKATESH,
       AGED MAJOR,
       R/AT NO.1,
       THIMMARAYAPPA GARDEN,
                            2

     9TH CROSS, KADHIRAPPA ROAD,
     DODDAKUNTE,
     COX TOWN,
     BANGALORE-560005.

2.   DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
     UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
     D.O.XI NO.487/1, CMH ROAD,
     NEAR AMARJYOTHI NURSING HOME,
     INDIRANAGAR,
     BANGALORE-560038.
                                ... RESPONDENTS

( R1-SERVED,
  BY SRI.A.M.VENKATESH, ADV. FOR R2)


      THIS M.F.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
21.02.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.1948/2012 ON THE FILE
OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
XXXIII ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND
ETC.,

     THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                    JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the

learned counsel for 2nd respondent-Insurance Company.

2. Since, the liability is not disputed by the 2nd

respondent-Insurance Company, hence, issuance of notice

to the 1st respondent is dispensed with.

3. The claimants in MVC No.1948/2012 on the file

of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V and the Court of Small

Causes, Bangalore is impugning the judgment and award

dated 21.02.2013. The claim is filed on account of death of

one Madamma who died in the motor vehicle accident

which took place on 05.02.2012 at about 4.00 pm. The

accident is not in dispute and the death is also not in

dispute. The claimants are the son and two married

daughters of deceased-Madamma. The Tribunal has

awarded a compensation of Rs.50,000/- along with

interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The claimants are

seeking enhancement in this appeal.

4. The claimants claim that the deceased was

earning Rs.8,000/- per month however, income is not

established by the claimants. In the absence of proof

relating to the income, the chart prepared by the

'Karnataka State Legal Services Authority' would be the

guiding factor. As per the said Chart, for the accident

which took place in 2012, the income would be taken at

Rs.7,000/- per month. The Tribunal has given finding that

the deceased was earning Rs.8,000/- per month and the

said finding is not questioned by the Insurer. As per

principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the

case of National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Pranay Sethi

reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, 25% of the monthly

income is to be added towards 'loss of future prospects.

Then it comes to Rs.1,750/-. (7,000X25/100) Therefore,

the monthly income of the deceased is taken at Rs.8,750/-

(7,000+1,750).

5. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit

that the married daughters of the deceased were staying

with the deceased. Hence, the son and two married

daughters should be treated as the dependents of the

deceased and the Tribunal is justified in considering 1/3 rd

was the expenses of the deceased.

6. Learned counsel for the insurance company

would submit that the evidence on record would indicate

that two daughters of the deceased were married and after

their marriage, they were not residing with the deceased,

as such, they are not the dependents of the deceased.

7. This Court perused the records and there is no

evidence to show that the two married daughters were

staying with the deceased and they were dependants of

the deceased. Under the circumstances, the Tribunal has

held that son is the only dependant of the deceased.

Hence, the Tribunal instead of deducting 1/3rd of the

income towards expenditure, should have deducted 50%

towards personal expenses of the deceased. Therefore,

50% of the income towards personal expenses is to be

deducted and the monthly contribution to the family is

taken as Rs.4,375/-(8,750x50/100=4,375). The

appropriate multiplier is '13'. Hence, the compensation

under the head 'Loss of dependency' is recalculated and

quantified as follows:

Rs.4,375 x 12 x 13 = Rs.6,82,500/-

8. It is also noticed that the claimants being the

children of the deceased are entitled for a sum of

Rs.40,000/- each under the head of 'loss of parental

consortium'. The claimants are entitled for a sum of

Rs.15,000/- towards 'loss of estate' and Rs.15,000/-

under the head of 'funeral expenses'.

9. Hence, the appellants are entitled for a total

compensation, under various heads as follows:

       Loss of dependency     Rs.6,82,500/-
                              (Rs.4,375x12x13 = Rs.6,82,500)


       Loss of consortium     Rs.1,20,000/-
                              (Rs.40,000x3)

       Loss of estate         Rs.15,000/-

       Funeral expenses       Rs.15,000

              TOTAL           Rs.8,32,500/-

10. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to total

compensation of Rs.8,32,500/- as against Rs.50,000/-

awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation is

Rs.7,82,500/- (Rs.8,32,500-50,000). Enhanced

compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per

annum from the date of filing of the petition till deposit.

11. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

i. The appeal is allowed in-part.

ii. The judgment and award dated 21.02.2013, passed in MVC No.1948/2012, on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore is modified to the above extent.

iii. The appellants are entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.7,82,500/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Eighty-two Thousand Five Hundred only), along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till deposit in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal.

iv. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay.

       v.     Draw award accordingly.



                                              Sd/-
                                             JUDGE


JS/-