Karnataka High Court
Smt Palamma vs Sri Pramodkumar on 18 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:15275
MFA No. 5875 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5875 OF 2019 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. PALAMMA
W/O. LATE PALAIAH
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS.
2. SMT. PALAKSHAMMA
W/O. LATE BASAVARAJA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS.
3. THEJA B.
D/O. LATE BASAVARAJA
AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS.
4. ROOJA B.
D/O. LATE BASAVARAJA
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS.
5. B. BORAIAH
Digitally signed by
MOUNESHWARAPPA S/O. LATE BASAVARAJA
NAGARATHNA
Location: HIGH
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF
KATAVVANAHALLI VILLAGE
CHALLAKERE TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 522.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SIDDAPPA B.M., ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:15275
MFA No. 5875 of 2019
AND:
1. SRI PRAMODKUMAR
S/O. S.H. AMBAPRASAD
AGE 51 YEARS
RESIDENT OF TA-ABC-BADI
ROAD DHOLPUR RAJ
A/A MUBARIK-AGRA
U.P-2822001.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
B.D. ROAD
CHITRADURGA TOWN
ISSUED BY DIVISIONAL OFFICER (322900)
BLOCK-40, 2ND FLOOR
SKY TOWER SANJAY PLACE
AGRA-2820, M.G. ROAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. ARUNA Y., ADVOCATE, FOR R-2, AND
NOTICE TO R-2 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE
ORDER DATED 17-1-2020)
***
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V. ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 24-4-2019 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.322 OF 2018 ON
THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND M.A.C.T., CHALLAKERE,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:15275
MFA No. 5875 of 2019
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the claimants aggrieved by the
judgment and award dated 24-4-2019 passed in M.V.C.
No.322 of 2018 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and
Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Challakere,
whereby, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.11,08,000/-
as compensation with interest at the rate of 9% per
annum from the date of filing of the petition till the date of
realisation.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein
shall be referred to in terms of their status before the
Tribunal.
3. The claimants, being the wife, mother and three
children of Sri Basavaraj (hereinafter referred to as
'deceased'), filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation for the
death of the deceased inter alia contending that on
8-2-2018 at 8:00 p.m., when the deceased was returning
to his Katavvanahalli Village from Neralagunte Village on
NC: 2024:KHC:15275
his motorcycle, bearing Registration No.KA-35 V-6883, a
lorry, bearing Registration No.RJ-11 GA-8215, coming
from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner
and dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased, as a
result, the deceased sustained injuries and died on the
spot. The claimants of the deceased contended that the
deceased was working as a Mason and earning
Rs.20,000/- per month. Due to his untimely death, they
have lost their dependency and hence, claimed the
compensation on various heads.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.
5. As there is no dispute regarding the death of the
deceased in a road traffic accident occurred on 8-2-2018
due to rash and negligent driving of lorry, bearing
Registration No.RJ-11 GA-8215, by its driver and liability
of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the only point that
arises for my consideration in this appeal is:
NC: 2024:KHC:15275
"Whether quantum of compensation awarded
by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it
call for enhancement?"
6. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for
the parties and perusing the judgment and award of the
Tribunal, I am of the view that the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it is on the
lower side and hence, it is required to be enhanced.
7. In order to substantiate their claim, claimant
No.2-wife of the deceased examined herself as PW1 and
got marked eleven documents as Exs.P1 to P11. On behalf
of the respondents, none of the witnesses was examined,
but Ex.R1-copy of insurance policy was marked.
8. The claimants have established the fact that the
driver of the lorry came in a rash and negligent manner
and dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased, as a
result, the deceased sustained injuries and died on the
spot. The claimants have stated that at the time of the
accident, the deceased was working as Mason and was
NC: 2024:KHC:15275
earning Rs.20,000/- per month. Apart from oral evidence
of PW1, the claimants have not furnished any documents
to prove that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per
month. The deceased was aged about 43 years as on the
date of accident. The accident is of the year 2018. During
the relevant period, the notional income assessed is
Rs.12,500/- per month. As per the dictum of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company
Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017)
16 SCC 680, 25% of the income has to be added towards
future prospects, which comes to Rs.3,125/- (12,500 X
25%). Thus, the total salary would be Rs.15,625/- per
month (12,500 + 3,125), annually it will be Rs.1,87,500/-
(15,625 X 12). There are five dependents. As such, 1/4th
of income of the deceased has to be deducted towards his
personal expenses, i.e. Rs.1,87,500 X ¼ = Rs.46,875/-.
After deduction, the amount to be contributed to his family
would be Rs.1,40,625/- (1,87,500 minus 46,875).
Considering the age of the deceased, '14' multiplier would
be applicable, thus, the compensation payable under the
NC: 2024:KHC:15275
head of 'loss of dependency' would be Rs.19,68,750/-
(1,40,625 X 14) as against Rs.10,08,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
9. In the case of Magma General Insurance Co.
Ltd. v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and Others
reported in 2018 ACJ 2782 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme
Court by referring to the decision of the Constitution
Bench in Pranay Sethi (supra) has discussed about
granting the compensation under the head of 'loss of
consortium' and has also issued guidelines for grant of
'spousal consortium', 'parental consortium' and 'filial
consortium'. The claimants are the mother, wife and three
children of the deceased. In view of the ratio laid down by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision, the
claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.40,000/-
each towards 'loss of consortium' as against Rs.1,00,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
10. The Tribunal has not granted any compensation
under the heads of 'loss of estate' and 'funeral expenses'.
NC: 2024:KHC:15275
Thus, the claimants are entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards
'loss of estate' and Rs.15,000/- towards 'funeral
expenses'.
11. Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following
compensation:
HEADS Rs.
Loss of dependency 19,68,750.00
Loss of consortium/loss of love and
2,00,000.00
affection (Rs.40,000 X 5 dependents)
Loss of estate 15,000.00
Funeral expenses 15,000.00
TOTAL 21,98,750.00
Less: Compensation awarded by the
11,08,000.00
Tribunal
ENHANCED COMPENSATION 10,90,750.00
12. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part. The
judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to
the extent stated hereinabove. The claimants are entitled
for a total compensation of Rs.21,98,750/- as against
Rs.11,08,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at
the rate of 6% per annum on the additional compensation
of Rs.10,90,750/- from the date of filing of the claim
petition till the date of its realisation.
NC: 2024:KHC:15275
13. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed
to deposit the additional compensation amount together
with interest within eight weeks from the date of receipt of
a copy of this judgment.
14. The apportionment of the enhanced
compensation shall be made as per the order of the
Tribunal.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KVK
