Karnataka High Court

Devamma vs Alla Lakshmi Kantha Reddy on 13 December, 2023

Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad

Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad

                                               -1-
                                                             NC: 2023:KHC:45391
                                                        MFA No. 1197 of 2021




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

                                            BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
                   MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1197 OF 2021 (MV)


                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    DEVAMMA
                         W/O HANUMANTHABHOVI @
                         HANUMANTHAPPA
                         AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
                         HOUSE HOLD WORK.

                   2.    HANUMANTHABHOVI
                         @ HANUMANTHAPPA
                         S/O CHANDRABHOVI AGRICULTURIST
                         AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

                   3.    SHYLAJA
                         D/O HANUMANTHABHOVI
                         AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
Digitally signed         STUDENT
by
DHANALAKSHMI
MURTHY             4.    SUDHA
Location: High           D/O HANUMANTHABHOVI
Court of
Karnataka                @ HANUMANTHAPPA
                         AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
                         STUDENT
                         ALL ARE R/O JSR BOVIHATTY VILLAGE
                         HOSADURGA TALUK
                         CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501
                                                                  ...APPELLANTS
                   (BY SRI. MANJUNATH N D., ADVOCATE)
                            -2-
                                         NC: 2023:KHC:45391
                                       MFA No. 1197 of 2021




AND:

1.   ALLA LAKSHMI KANTHA REDDY
     S/O VEERA REDDY
     AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
     R/O FLAT NO.201 2ND LINE
     NEAR OLD RTO OFFICE
     PATTBIPURAM GUNTUR DISTRICT
     ANDRA PRADESH -522006.

2.   THE MANGER LEGAL
     UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL
     INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
     REG OFFICE-200-2008
     CRYSTAL PLAZA OPP INTINITY MAIL
     LINK ROAD ANDHERI (WEST)
     MUMBAI-400058
                                            ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.B.PRADEEP., ADVOCATE FOR R2:
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)


       THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 14.05.2020,

PASSED IN MVC NO.573/2019, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR

CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., AND MACT, HOSADURGA, 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-
                                          NC: 2023:KHC:45391
                                       MFA No. 1197 of 2021




                          JUDGMENT

1. This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor

Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for

short) has been filed by the claimants being aggrieved by

the judgment and award dated 14.5.2020 passed by the

MACT, Hosadurga in MVC 573/2019.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly

stated are that on 18.7.2019, when the deceased Sudeep

was riding the motorcycle bearing registration NO.KA-16-

EG-6553 near Dasayyanahatti Cross near Sheeranakatte

Majire on Hosadurga-Hiriyur road, at that time, a lorry

bearing registration No.AP-07-TH-7457 which was being

driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the

deceased. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the

deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to

the injuries.

NC: 2023:KHC:45391

3. The claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of

the Act seeking compensation for the death of the

deceased along with interest.

4. On service of summons, the respondents appeared

through counsel and filed written statements in which the

averments made in the claim petition were denied.

5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the

Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded

the evidence. The claimants, in order to prove the case,

examined claimant No.1 as PW-1 and got exhibited

documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P10. On behalf of

respondents, neither any witness was examined nor any

document was produced. The Claims Tribunal, by the

impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took

place on account of rash and negligent driving of the

offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which, the

deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries.

The Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled to

NC: 2023:KHC:45391

a compensation of Rs.14,15,800/- along with interest at

the rate of 6% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company

to deposit the compensation amount along with interest.

Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.

6. The learned counsel for the claimants has raised the

following contentions:

a) Firstly, the claimants claim that the deceased was

aged about 19 years at the time of the accident and he

was earning Rs.30,000/- per month by working as Coolie.

But the Tribunal is not justified in taking the monthly

income of the deceased as merely as Rs.9,000/-.

b) Secondly, as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE

CO. LTD. -v- PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS [AIR 2017

SC 5157], in case the deceased was self-employed or on

a fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established

income towards 'future prospects' should be the warrant

where the deceased was below the age of 40 years. The

same has been rightly considered by the Tribunal.

NC: 2023:KHC:45391

c) Thirdly, as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of PRANAY SETHI (supra),

the claimants are entitled for Rs.15,000/- towards 'loss of

estate' and Rs.15,000/- towards 'funeral expenses'.

d) Fourthly, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL

INSURANCE CO. LTD. -V- NANU RAM [2018 ACJ

2782], each of the claimants are entitled for

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

love and affection and consortium'.

e) Lastly, considering the age and avocation of the

deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the

Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, he prays for allowing

the appeal.

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the

Insurance Company has raised the following counter-

contentions:

a) Firstly, even though the claimants claim that the

deceased was earning Rs.30,000/- per month, the same is

NC: 2023:KHC:45391

not established by the claimants by producing documents.

Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of

the deceased notionally.

b) Secondly, since the claimants have not established

the income of the deceased, they are not entitled for

compensation towards 'future prospects'.

c) Thirdly, on appreciation of oral and documentary

evidence and considering the age and avocation of the

deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the

Tribunal is just and reasonable. Hence, he prays for

dismissal of the appeal.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and

perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.

9. It is not in dispute that Sudeep died in the road

traffic accident occurred on 18.7.2019 due to rash and

negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

NC: 2023:KHC:45391

10. The claimants claim that deceased was earning

Rs.30,000/- per month. But they have not produced any

documents to prove the income of the deceased. In the

absence of proof of income, the notional income has to be

assessed. As per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka

State Legal Services Authority, for the accident taken

place in the year 2019, the notional income of the

deceased has to be taken at Rs.14,000/- p.m. To the

aforesaid income, 40% has been rightly added on account

of future prospects in view of the law laid down by the

Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in 'PRANAY

SETHI' (supra). Thus, the monthly income comes to

Rs.19,600/-. Since the deceased was a bachelor, it is

appropriate to deduct 50% of the income of the deceased

towards personal expenses and remaining amount has to

be taken as his contribution to the family. The deceased

was aged about 19 years at the time of the accident and

multiplier applicable to his age group is '18'. Thus, the

claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.21,16,800/-

NC: 2023:KHC:45391

(Rs.19,600*12*18*50%) on account of 'loss of

dependency'.

11. In addition, the claimants are entitled to

compensation of Rs.15,000/- on account of 'loss of estate'

and compensation of Rs.15,000/- on account of 'funeral

expenses'.

12. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in

the case of 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE' (supra),

claimants Nos.1 and 2, parents of the deceased are

entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- each under the

head of 'loss of filial consortium'.

13. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following

compensation:

             Compensation under                 Amount in
               different Heads                    (Rs.)

           Loss of dependency                     21,16,800

           Funeral expenses                          15,000

           Loss of estate                            15,000

           Loss of Filial consortium                 80,000

                            Total                22,26,800
                              - 10 -
                                          NC: 2023:KHC:45391

14. In the result, the following order is passed:

ORDER

a) The appeal is allowed in part.

b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.

c) The claimants are entitled to a total compensation of

Rs.22,26,800/- as against Rs.14,15,800/- awarded by

the Tribunal.

d) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the

compensation amount along with interest at 6% p.a. from

the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of

realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of

receipt of copy of this judgment.