Karnataka High Court
Smt Jyothi B A vs Shri Krishnan S K on 22 November, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:42008
MFA No. 2004 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
MFA NO. 2004 OF 2014 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT JYOTHI B A
W/O LATE B. ANJANEYA SETTY
NOW AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
2. KUM. SOUMYA B.A.
D/O LATE B. ANJANEYA SETTY
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
3. KUM. TRIVENI B.A.
D/O LATE B.ANJANEYA SETTY
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
4. KUM. LAKSHMI B.A.
D/O LATE B.ANJANEYA SETTY
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
5. SMT. SOUJANYA B.A.
D/O LATE B.ANJANEYA SETTY
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
Digitally signed by
MALA K N 6. SHRI Y. SANNAPPA SETTY
Location: HIGH S/O LATE B. RAMA SETTY
COURT OF AGED ABOUT 78 YEARS
KARNATAKA
ALL ARE R/AT NO.2942
14TH CROSS, K.R.ROAD
BANASHANKARI 2ND STAGE
BANGALORE-560 070 ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. D. MANMOHAN, ADV.)
AND:
1. SHRI KRISHNAN S K
S/O SHRI KONA GOUNDER
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:42008
MFA No. 2004 of 2014
AGED ABOUT MAJOR
NO.2/105, NEW NO.2/124
SAMICHETTYPATTI, NALLAMPALLI
DHARMAPURI, PIN:636 807
TAMIL NADU STATE
2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER
M/S ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
1ST AND 2ND FLOOR
"SHRI BALAJI SOUVERIGN"
NO.132, BRIGADE ROAD
BANGALORE-560 025 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAVI S. SAMPRATHI, ADV. 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 11.10.2013 PASSED
IN MVC NO.1697/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE XII ADDL. SMALL
CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE (SCCH-8), PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
In this appeal, the petitioners have challenged the
judgment and award dated 11.10.2013 passed in
M.V.C.No.1697/2012 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Bangalore (SCCH-8) ('the Tribunal' for short).
2. For the sake of convenience, the rank of the parties
shall be referred to as per their status before the Tribunal.
NC: 2023:KHC:42008
3. Brief facts of the case are, the husband of petitioner
No.1, father of petitioner Nos.2 to 5 and son of petitioner
No.6 by name B.Anjanya Setty, the deceased, while driving
the Maruti van bearing No.KA-05/ME-5305 on N.H.4 from
Tumkur to Bangalore near Chandanahosahalli gate of
Nelamangala taluk, met with an accident at 6.15 a.m. on
27.06.2011 hit by a lorry bearing No.TN-29/AB-0940 injuring
him. During transit to Dabaspet Primary Health Centre, he
died. The petitioners being the dependants have approached
the Tribunal seeking grant of compensation of Rs.50 lakhs.
The claim was opposed by the Insurance Company of the
lorry. After taking the evidence, the Tribunal awarded
Rs.17,84,833/- with interest @ 6% per annum. Pleading
inadequacy and seeking enhancement of compensation, the
petitioners have filed this appeal on various heads.
4. Heard the arguments of Sri.D.Manmohan, learned
counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Ravi S.Samprathi, learned
counsel for Insurance Company.
5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the
petitioners that the deceased was aged 52 years, he was
NC: 2023:KHC:42008
running a provision stores, he was an income-tax assessee
and he was earning huge income. But the Tribunal did not
consider the actual income of the deceased at the time of
accident and sought for enhancement.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance
Company has contended that the Tribunal has considered the
annual income of the deceased at Rs.2,04,343/- from the
business for the assessment year 2010-11. After deducting
TDS of 10%, correctly assessed the multiplicand and applied
'11' multiplier and assessed the compensation. He is fair in
his submission that compensation awarded under
conventional heads is on the lower side and it can be
assessed as per the settled principles.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the
arguments addressed on behalf of the parties and perused
the records.
8. There is no dispute as to the accident, cause of the
accident, death of the deceased on account of accidental
injuries. The 1st petitioner being the wife, 6th petitioner
NC: 2023:KHC:42008
being the father and petitioner Nos.2 to 5 being unmarried
daughters are entitled to claim compensation. The material
on record did point out that the deceased was doing
business, holding Pan card and income-tax assessee. Ex.P21
is the copy of the Saral form for the year 2010-11 whereas
the deceased having declared himself that his annual income
is Rs.2,04,343/- from his business. He has paid income-tax
of Rs.2,664/-. If the income-tax is excluded, his income
comes to Rs.2,01,679/-. The Tribunal has deducted 10% of
the total income as the tax. The deceased himself has
deducted tax of Rs.2,664/- in the returns deducting 10%
towards income-tax is not proper. Much apart, an income of
Rs.2,04,343/- will not attract more tax as it comes within the
exemption limits. The deceased was aged 52 years at the
time of accident.
9. In a case of this nature, compensation has to be
determined by following the principles settled by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in National Insurance Co.Ltd. -vs- Pranay
Sethi and Others1 and Sarla Varma (Smt.) and Others -
(2017) 16 SCC 680
NC: 2023:KHC:42008
vs- Delhi Transport Corporation and Another 2 so also
the principle laid down in Shri Ram General Insurance Co.
Ltd. -Vs- Bhagat Singh Rawat & Ors.3
10. In view of the latest dictum, the compensation
under the conventional heads is fixed for all the petitioners
and as laid down in Pranay Sethi's case (supra), 10%
appreciation has to be given for every 3 years. By following
the said principles, compensation has to be determined.
11. The total income of the deceased as discussed
above is Rs.2,04,343/- - income tax of Rs.2,664/-, the net
income of the deceased comes to Rs.2,01,679/-. Future
prospects of 15% is applicable i.e., Rs.30,251/-, if it is
added, it comes to Rs.2,31,930/-. Since there are six
dependants, 1/4th has to be deducted towards personal
expenses i.e., Rs.57,982/-. The multiplicand comes to
Rs.1,73,948/-. If it is multiplied by '11', loss of dependency
comes to Rs.19,13,428/-. Under the conventional heads,
towards loss of consortium to the wife at Rs.40,000/-, loss of
(2009) 6 SCC 121
Civil Appeal Nos.2410-2412/2023, decided on 27.03.2023
NC: 2023:KHC:42008
love and affection to other petitioners together at
Rs.50,000/-; towards funeral expenses and loss of estate at
Rs.15,000/- each, amounting to Rs.1,20,000/-. Since the
claim is of the year 2012, in view of the judgment in Bhagat
Singh Rawat's case (supra), 40% has to be added to the
conventional heads i.e., Rs.48,000/-. The petitioners are
entitled to Rs.1,68,000/- under the conventional heads. If it
is added, total compensation comes to Rs.20,81,428/- as
against Rs.17,84,833/- assessed by the Tribunal. Hence,
petitioners are entitled for enhancement of Rs.2,96,595/-,
which is the just compensation to which the petitioners are
entitled. Hence, the appeal merits consideration. In the
result, the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award is modified;
(iii) The petitioners are entitled to enhanced
compensation of Rs.2,96,595/- with interest at
the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced
compensation from the date of petition till its
realization;
NC: 2023:KHC:42008
(iv) Rest of the judgment and award of the Tribunal
is kept intact;
(v) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount within eight weeks
from the date of receipt of certified copy of this
judgment.
(vi) The amount in deposit, if any, shall be
transmitted to the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KNM
CT:HS
