Karnataka High Court
Smt. P Gowri vs Smt Juaitha Begam R on 22 March, 2022
Bench: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
M.F.A.NO.5641/2012 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. P. GOWRI,
W/O LATE PERIYASWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
2. KUMARI SARNYA,
AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS,
D/O LATE PERIYASAMY
3. MASTER JAUYACHANDRU,
S/O LATE PERIYASAMY,
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS,
4. MASTER VIGNESH,
S/O LATE PERIYASAMY,
AGED 10 YEARS,
SINCE PETITIONER NO.2 & 5 ARE MINORS,
REPRESENTED BY PETITIONER NO.1,
AS A NATURAL GUARDIAN/MOTHER.
5. SMT. JAYA,
W/O RAMACHANDRAM,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/AT NO.44, 2ND CROSS,
1ST MAIN, RPC LAYOUT,
BANGALORE.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI S. S. MAHENDRA, ADVOCATE)
2
AND:
1. SMT. JUAITHA BEGAM R.
W/O MOHAMED RAFEEK,
R/AT NO.3, ATTUMANDAI STREET,
THENNUR, THIRUCHI-62017,
STATE OF TAMIL NADU.
2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER,
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SHANKARNARAYANA BUILDING,
M.G.ROAD,
BANGALORE-560001.
... RESPONDENTS
(R1-NOTICE DISPENSED WITH V/O DT:01/04/2014
SRI L. SREEKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS M.F.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED:12.12.20211 PASSED IN MVC NO.2693/2010 ON
THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC.,
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The present appeal is preferred by the claimants
challenging the judgment and award dated 12.12.2011,
passed in MVC No.2693/2010, on the file of MACT,
Bangalore, seeking enhancement.
2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:
On 07.03.2010 at about 11.00 p.m., the deceased -
Periyasamy who was the driver-cum-owner of 407 tempo
bearing No.TN-23-6844 was proceeding from Rasipuram to
Kumbakonam on Trichy Highway, and after crossing
Namakkal near Valayapatti E.B.Power House, the left rear
tyre of tempo got punctured. He had parked tempo on left
side of road by switching on the parking lights. The
deceased and one Prabhu and Loghu got down from tempo
to replace the wheel. They put jack and loosened nuts. The
deceased was assisting Loghu, who was holding torch
light. At that time, the driver of a white colour car bearing
No.TN-45-AM-6351 who was proceeding from Tirchy from
Namakkal drove the same in a rash and negligent manner,
came from back side and dashed against the deceased.
Due to which, he sustained grievous bleeding injuries on
his head and other parts of the body and succumbed to the
injuries on the spot. The deceased was aged 43 years and
was a onion dealer and was earning Rs.15,000/- pm.
3. The claimants are wife, daughter, son and
mother of the deceased. A claim petition was filed by the
claimants under Section 166 of the M.V. Act, claiming
compensation. The Tribunal after appreciating the material
on record, allowed the petition in part and awarded
compensation of Rs.6,22,000/- along with interest at 8%
per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit.
The Tribunal held respondent Nos.1 and 2 therein, jointly
and severally liable to pay the compensation.
4. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the
appellants and learned counsel for respondent No.2 -
Insurance Company and perused the material on record.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants
submitted that the Tribunal has not awarded 20% towards
the loss of prospects in life. Therefore, the same has to be
awarded. Further, it is submitted that the compensation
awarded under the head "loss of consortium" is lesser on
side. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd -v-
Pranay Sethi and Others reported in AIR 2017
SC 5157, compensation has to be awarded to the
mother and wife of the deceased. Therefore, it is
submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
has to be enhanced.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for
respondent No.2-Insurance Company has justified the
judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and submitted
that there is no need to enhance the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, prays to dismiss the
appeal.
7. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal
under various heads is as follows:
Compensation
Sl.No. Different Heads
Amount
1 Loss of dependency R.5,67,000/-
2 Transportation of dead body Rs.5,000/-
3 Loss of consortium Rs. 10,000/-
4 Loss of love and affection Rs.20,000/-
5 Loss of estate Rs.10,000/-
6 Funeral and other ceremonies Rs.10,000/-
Total Rs.6,22,000/-
8. The deceased was working Onion Vendor and
was aged about 43 years at the time of accident.
Therefore, as per the principles of law laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case, for a
person who is self-employed aged between 40 to 50 years,
25% has to be added to the income towards the "loss of
future prospects in life". Therefore, loss of dependency
needs to be re-calculated. The deceased was aged 43
years at the time of the accident. Therefore, the
appropriate multiplier applicable was '14'. Further, the
accident has occurred in the year 2010. Therefore, as per
the Notional Income Chart preferred by the Karnataka
State Legal Service Authority, notional income of
Rs.5,500/- is to be taken into consideration. Further, 25%
(Rs.5,500/- x 25% = Rs.1,375/-) is to be added to the loss
of future prospects in life. Therefore, the total income of
the deceased is taken at Rs.6,875/- (Rs.5,500/- +
Rs.1,375/-). The deceased had three children, wife and
mother. Therefore, 1/4th of income has to be deducted
towards personal expenses and 3/4th towards contribution
to the family. Therefore, the compensation under the head
"loss of dependency" is re-calculated as follows:
(Rs.6,875/- x 3/4 x 14 x 12 = Rs.8,66,250/-)
9. Further, as per the principles of law laid down
by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case,
appellant Nos.1 to 4 are wife and minor children and
appellant No.5 is the mother of the deceased. Therefore,
the appellants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards the
head "loss of consortium". Hence, appellant Nos.1 to 5 are
entitled to Rs.40,000/- each under the head "loss of
consortium", which comes to Rs.2,00,000/-.
10. The compensation of Rs.5,000/- awarded by
the Tribunal towards "transportation of dead body",
Rs.10,000/- towards "loss of estate", Rs.10,000/-
towards funeral and other ceremonies are found to be
proper. Hence, they are kept in tact. Rs.20,000/- was
awarded by the Tribunal towards "loss of love and
affection" which is on the lower side. Hence, Rs.25,000/- is
awarded to the claimants under the said head. Therefore,
the claimants are entitled to Rs.25,000/- under the head
"loss of love and affection. Therefore, the appellants are
entitled to the enhanced compensation as follows:
Compensation
Sl.No. Different Heads
Amount
Loss of dependency
1 R.8,66,250/-
(Rs.6,875/- x 3/4 x 14 x 12 = Rs.8,66,250/-)
2 Transportation of dead body Rs.5,000/-
Loss of consortium
3 Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rs.40,000/- x 5)
4 Loss of love and affection Rs.25,000/-
5 Loss of estate Rs.10,000/-
6 Funeral and other ceremonies Rs.10,000/-
Total Rs.11,16,250/-
11. The Tribunal has awarded the compensation of
Rs.6,22,000/-, but the appellants are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.11,16,250/-. Hence, the appellants
are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.4,94,250/-
(Rs.11,16,250/- - Rs.6,22,000/-). Therefore, the
appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation of
Rs.4,94,250/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per
annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
12. Accordingly, I pass the following
ORDER
Appeal is allowed in part.
The appellants are entitled to enhanced
compensation of Rs.4,94,250/- along with the rate of
interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the
date of realization, in addition to what has been awarded
by the Tribunal.
Draw award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
PB
