Karnataka High Court
Kum Nagalakshmi vs Sri S Shivanna on 2 February, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:4601
MFA No. 10736 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 10736 OF 2012 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. KUM NAGALAKSHMI
AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS
D/O LATE LAKSHMI
2. SRI PALANNA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
S/O SRI THAMMAJJA
AGRICULTURIST
3. SMT CHANDRAMMA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
W/O SRI PALANNA
AGRICULTURIST
THE APPELLANT NO.1 IS A MINOR
Digitally
REPRESENTED BY HER NEXT FRIEND,
signed by
BHARATHI S
NATURAL GUARDIAN, GRANDMOTHER
Location: APPELLANT NO.3
HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
BOMMENAHALLI VILLAGE
CHITRADURGA TALUK
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. R KRISHNA REDDY., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI S SHIVANNA
S/O SRI SIDDAPPA
MAJOR
R/O BOMMENAHALLI VILLAGE
CHITRADURGA TALUK
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:4601
MFA No. 10736 of 2012
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO., LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE, B.M. COMPLEX
LAKSHMI BAZAAR, CHITRADURGA
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N.R. RANGAE GOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.4.2012 PASSED IN MVC
NO.960/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
FAST TRACK COURT, CHITRADURGA, DISMISSING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The above appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the
judgment and award dated 20.4.2012 passed in MVC
No.960/2010 by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track
Court), Chitradurga1.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are
referred as per their rank before the Tribunal.
3. The Tribunal by its judgment and award
dated20.4.2012 has dismissed the claim petition. Being
aggrieved the above appeal is filed by the claimants.
Hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'
NC: 2024:KHC:4601
4. The claim petition has been filed by the adopted
daughter and parents of one Lakshmi who died on 08.05.2010
in a road traffic accident, when a motor cycle hit the deceased
when she was walking on the road. The owner and insurer of
the motor cycle were arrayed as Respondent Nos.1 and 2
before the Tribunal. The Tribunal answered issue No.3 and
recorded a finding that the deceased died in the accident due to
rash and negligent driving by the rider of the motor cycle.
However, the Tribunal held that the claimants have not
produced any material on record to show that they are the legal
representatives of the deceased and are depending on the
income of the deceased. Hence, claim petition was dismissed.
5. The submissions of learned counsel for the Appellant
and learned counsel for Respondent No.2 have been heard. The
finding of the Tribunal on negligence and liability is not under
challenge. Hence, the only question that arises for
consideration is 'whether dismissal of the claim on the ground
that the claimants are not legal representatives or dependents
of the deceased is just and proper'?.
6. It is forthcoming that Claimant No.1 claims to be the
adopted daughter of the deceased. However, no oral or
NC: 2024:KHC:4601
documentary evidence has been adduced before the Tribunal to
prove the factum of adoption. The deceased was admittedly
married and her husband Venkatesh has also expired. The
Tribunal has recorded a finding that the deceased was residing
at the matrimonial home and parents of her husband are alive.
However, they are not made parties either in the claim
proceedings or in the present appeal.
7. It is relevant to note that claimant No.3 mother is a
class-1 heir as per the Schedule to the Hindu Succession Act,
1955 and claimant No.2 - father is a class-2 heir. Under the
circumstances it is required to be held that claimant No.3 -
mother is the legal representative of the deceased and is
entitled for the compensation that is to be awarded for the
death of the deceased.
8. With regard to whether the claimants were
depending on the income of the deceased, as rightly held by
the Tribunal no material is produced to demonstrate that they
are depending on the income of the deceased. However, merely
due to the fact that the mother is not depending upon the
income of the deceased, it will not result in dismissal of the
claim petition. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of A.
NC: 2024:KHC:4601
MANAVALAGAN V/S A. KRISHNAMURTHY AND OTHERS2
reported in has considered the said position and held that the
claimants who are not the legal representatives of the deceased
would not be entitled to loss of dependency but would however,
be entitled to loss of estate which would be a fraction of the
loss of dependency. In the said case of A.Manavalagan2, 25%
of the income was taken for assessment of the loss of estate.
Following the same, another Division Bench of this Court in the
case of Ashwathappa & anr., v. Sri Ravichandra T and
anr.,3 has also assessed the loss of estate by taking 25% of
the income, for the purpose of assessment of the same.
9. The deceased was aged 28 years. Hence, the
appropriate multiplier would be 17.
10. With regard to the income of the deceased, no
documentary material has been produced. However, in the
claim petition, it is stated that the claimant was doing
household and arecanut work and that she was self-employed.
In view of the same, the income is required to be assessed as
notional income as per the chart followed for settlement of
ILR 2004 KAR 3268
Judgment dated 29.3.2023 passed in MFA No.4096/2021
NC: 2024:KHC:4601
claims in the Lok Adalath conducted by the Legal Services
Authority and having regard to the date of accident i.e.,
8.5.2010 the income is assessed as `5,500/- pm.
11. To the said income 40% is required to be added
towards future prospects having regard to the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance
Company Limited V. Pranay Sethi and others4. In view of
the same, the loss of estate is reassessed as (`5,500/- less
25%=1375/- +40%=1925/-x12x17) `3,92,000/-.
12. The father and mother of the deceased are claimant
Nos.2 and 3. Hence, loss of consortium is required to be
awarded at `44,000/- each having regard to the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General
Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru
Ram and others5. Accordingly, loss of consortium is assessed
as (`44000/-x2) `88,000/-. A further sum of `16,500/- is to be
awarded towards funeral expenses.
13. It is forthcoming that the deceased was admitted to
the hospital and medical expenses towards the same was
(2017) 16 SCC 680
(2018) 18 SCC 130
NC: 2024:KHC:4601
incurred before the deceased succumbed to the injuries. The
medical bills are produced as Ex.P9 series and the same
amounts to `19,000/-, which is required to be awarded.
14. Accordingly, the total compensation under various
heads is assessed as follows:
Sl.No. Heads Amount Amount
awarded by awarded by this
the Tribunal Court (`)
(`)
1. Loss of 0.00 392000.00
estate/dependency
2. Loss of consortium 0.00 88000.00
3. Medical expenses 0.00 19000.00
4. Funeral expenses 0.00 16,500.00
Total 0.00 515,500.00
15. Hence, the claimants 2 and 3 are entitled for a
compensation of `5,15,500/- along with interest at 6% p.a.
16. In the result, the following order is passed:
ORDER
i) The above appeal is allowed;
NC: 2024:KHC:4601
ii) the judgment and award dated 20.4.2012 passed in
MVC No.960/2010 on the file of Additional Sessions
Judge (Fast Track Court), Chitradurga, is set aside;
iii) MVC No.960/2010 on the file of Additional Sessions
Judge (Fast Track Court), Chitradurga, is partly
allowed;
iv) The appellant Nos.2 and 3/claimant Nos.2 and 3
are entitled for a compensation of Rs.5,15,500/-
with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till
its realisation;
v) The second respondent - insurer is directed to
deposit the compensation awarded along with the
accrued interest within eight weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment;
vi) Consequent to deposit of the compensation
amount, 75% shall be payable to appellant
No.3/claimant No.3 and 25% to appellant
No.2/claimant No.2;
vii) The entire compensation awarded to appellant
No.2/claimant No.2 shall be released in his favour;
viii) Out of the compensation payable to appellant
No.3/claimant No.3, 50% shall be released in her
favour and the balance 50% shall be kept in a fixed
deposit for a period of two years in any nationalized
bank as per the convenience of the appellant No.3
and liberty is reserved to appellant No.3 to draw
NC: 2024:KHC:4601
the periodical interest on the said deposit. Upon
maturity of the fixed deposit, the same shall be
released directly in favour of appellant No.3 without
any further orders either from the Tribunal or this
Court;
ix) The Registry to draw the modified decree
accordingly.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
PNV/nd
