Karnataka High Court
Sri Ramanna vs The Manager on 8 August, 2024
Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
MFA No. 4015 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4015 OF 2019 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI RAMANNA
S/O LATE KALE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
2. SMT.YASHODAMMA.D
W/O RAMANNA
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/AT T.BEKUPPE VILLAGE & POST
HONAKER HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 159
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. GIRISHA H M.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
5TH AND 6TH FLOOR
Digitally signed by KRUSHI BHAVAN BUILDING
HEMALATHA A
Location: HIGH HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 001.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. M.PRATHAP
S/O LATE NAGARAJ SHEETTY
MAHADESHWARA OIL MILL
SHANTHE KODIHALLI VILLAGE
KANAKAPURA TALUK
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 159
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.H.C.VRUSHABENDRAIAH., ADVOCATE FOR R1:
SRI. MAHADESHA NAIK S, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
MFA No. 4015 of 2019
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:20/03/2018,
PASSED IN MVC NO.164/2014 (OLD MVC.NO.144/2014), ON
THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT,
KANAKAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
ORAL 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 challenging the
judgment and award dated 20.03.2018 passed by the
MACT, Kanakapur in MVC 164/2014.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly
stated are that on 11.05.2013 when the deceased Ranjith
Kumar was proceeding on motorcycle bearing registration
No.KA-05-HV-8255 near T.Bekuppe Village towards
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
Kodihalli, at that time, a mini bus bearing registration
No.KA-05-D-9816 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.
3. The claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of
the Act seeking compensation for the death of the
deceased along with interest.
4. Upon service of notice, the respondents appeared
through counsel and respondent No.1 filed written
statement denying the averments made in the claim
petition.
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.P14. On behalf of
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
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
a compensation of Rs.873,000/- along with interest at the
rate of 7.5% 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 assert that the deceased was
aged about 21 years at the time of the accident and had a
monthly income of Rs.8,000/- by working as a Computer
Operator at Staffing Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and produced
salary certificate at Ex.P-11. However, the assessment of
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- by the Tribunal is
unjustified and erroneous.
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 cases, where the deceased was self-
employed or received a fixed salary, an addition of 40% of
the established income towards 'future prospects' is
warranted when the deceased was below the age of 40
years. The said principle shall be considered in the present
case.
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 is entitled to compensation
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
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 inadequate and on the lower side.
With the above contentions, the learned counsel
sought to allow the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the
Insurance Company has raised the following counter-
contentions:
a) Firstly, although the claimants claim that the
deceased was earning Rs.8,000/- per month, they have
failed to substantiate their claim with supporting
documents. Even as per Ex.P-11, salary certificate, the
gross salary is Rs.5,750/-. Consequently, the Tribunal has
correctly assessed the income of the deceased notionally.
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
b) Secondly, since the claimants have not established
the income of the deceased, they are not entitled for
compensation towards 'future prospects'.
c) Thirdly, the compensation awarded towards 'loss of
love and affection, loss of expectation, and funeral
expenses is exorbitant. However, 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.
d) Lastly, in light of the Division Bench decision of this
Court in the case of MS.JOYEETA BOSE AND OTHERS -
V- VENKATESHAN.V AND OTHERS (MFA 5896/2018
AND CONNECTED MATTERS DISPOSED OF ON
24.8.2020), the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal
at 7.5% p.a. on the compensation amount is on the higher
side.
With the above contentions, the learned counsel
sought to dismiss the appeal.
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.
9. It is not in dispute that Ranjith Kumar died in the
road traffic accident occurred on 11.05.2013 due to rash
and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.
10. The claimants claim that deceased was earning
Rs.8,000/- per month, except producing salary certificate
he has not produced any other documents and he has not
examined his employer or the author of the said
certificate. In the absence of proof of income, the notional
income has to be assessed. Considering the age, avocation
of the deceased and year of accident, the notional income
of the deceased shall be taken at Rs.8,000/- p.m. To the
aforesaid income, 40% has to be 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.11,200/-. Since the deceased is a bachelor, it is
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
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 21 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.12,09,600/-
(Rs.11,200*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),
claimant 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'.
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
13. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following
compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 12,09,600
Funeral expenses 15,000
Loss of estate 15,000
Loss of Filial consortium 80,000
Total 13,19,600
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.13,19,600/- as against Rs.873,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
d) Following the judgment of the Division Bench of this
Court in the case of 'MS.JOYEETA BOSE' (supra), the
enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6% per
annum.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:31619
e) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
compensation amount along with interest 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 a copy of
this judgment.
f) The apportionment, deposit and release of amount
shall be made in accordance with the terms of the award
of the Tribunal.
g) In view of the order dated 30.08.2023 passed by this
Court, the claimants are not entitled for interest on the
enhanced compensation for the delayed period of 291
days in filing the appeal.
Sd/-
(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD)
JUDGE
DM
