Karnataka High Court
Smt Ishya Sulthan vs Lokesh N on 28 May, 2024
Author: Rajendra Badamikar
Bench: Rajendra Badamikar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:17828
MFA No. 3736 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAJENDRA BADAMIKAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3736/2022 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. ISHYA SULTHAN,
W/O LATE MUYIN,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
2. KUM. MUSKAAN,
D/O LATE MUYIN,
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS,
BOTH ARE R/O RAJAJINAGARA,
MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT,
KOLAR DISTRICT.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. VISHWANATHA .K, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. LOKESH .N,
Digitally S/O NINGE GOWDA,
signed by KUTHAGALE VILLAGE,
SOWMYA D HOOKUNDA POST,
Location: KANAKAPURA TALUK,
High Court RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562 159.
of
Karnataka 2. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
23RD A CROSS ROAD,
GARDEN LAYOUT, SECTOR2,
HSR LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-02.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. D. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2,
V/O DATED 23.4.2024, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:17828
MFA No. 3736 of 2022
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.24.01.2022 PASSED IN MVC
NO.89/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, FTSC-I (POCSO), KOLAR, C/c. II
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, KOLAR,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the claimants under section
173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking
enhancement of the compensation awarded by
II Additional District Judge and Additional MACT, Kolar in
MVC No.89/2020 vide judgment dated 24.01.2022.
2. The brief factual matrix leading to the case are
as under:
Appellant No.1/petitioner No.1 is the mother of the
deceased Juneed, while appellant No.2/petitioner No.2 is
the minor sister of the deceased. The deceased had gone
to load chicken birds in the Eicher vehicle bearing
registration No.AP-26 TA-4749 and they were proceeding
towards Kolar from Krishnagiri and near Forest Danger
NC: 2024:KHC:17828
Notice Board on Hosur-Krishnagiri N.H.Road in
Parandapalli at about 0.45 hrs, the driver of the lorry
bearing registration No.KA-42-A-0444 drove it in a rash
and negligent manner, as a result, it met with an accident
and the deceased Juneed suffered fatal injuries and
succumbed because of the accidental injuries. The
appellants/petitioners claim that they were totally
dependent on the income of the deceased and they have
lost the bread earner. Hence, they filed a claim petition
seeking compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- from the
respondents.
3. The respondents appeared and contested the
matter by disputing the claim.
4. The Tribunal after appreciating the oral and
documentary evidence has awarded a compensation of
Rs.15,82,000/- to the claimants with interest @ 6% p.a.
from the date of petition till the date of realisation. Being
aggrieved by this judgment and award, the claimants are
before this Court seeking enhancement.
NC: 2024:KHC:17828
5. Heard the learned counsel for
appellants/claimants and the learned counsel for
respondent No.2/Insurance Company. Perused the
records.
6. The main contention of the learned counsel for
appellants is that the income of the deceased was taken
on lower side and 40% future prospects were not added
and hence, he seeks enhancement of the compensation.
7. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent
No.2 would support the judgment and award and sought
for dismissal of the appeal.
8. It is an undisputed fact that the deceased is the
son of claimant/petitioner No.1 and brother of minor
claimant/petitioner No.2. There is no serious dispute of the
fact that the death of the deceased is due to accidental
injuries involving the offending vehicle. The liability of the
Insurance Company is also undisputed. The liability is
fastened on respondent No.2/Insurance Company which is
not challenged and only dispute is in respect of quantum.
NC: 2024:KHC:17828
9. The undisputed fact is that the deceased was
aged about 19 years and was a bachelor. The Tribunal has
taken the notional income of the deceased at Rs.14,000/-
per month. The accident has occurred on 01.08.2020. This
Court is consistently taking notional income of Rs.14,500/-
per month pertaining to the accidents occurred in the year
2020. In the absence of any other material regarding proof
of income of the deceased, the notional income of
Rs.14,500/- needs to be taken.
10. The Tribunal has not added 40% future
prospects as per the decision reported in National
Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and
Others [(2017) 16 SCC 680]. Hence, 40% of the
notional income of Rs.14,500/- is required to be added to
the income of the deceased and his monthly income would
be Rs.20,300/- (14500X40%=5,800+14,500). Since the
deceased is aged about 19 years, multiplier '18' is
applicable and since he is a bachelor, 50% is to be
deducted towards personal expenses. Hence, the loss of
NC: 2024:KHC:17828
future income on account of dependency would be
Rs.21,92,400/- (Rs.20,300X50%= 10150x12x18).
11. Further, claimant/petitioner No.1 is the mother
of the deceased and she is entitled for consortium of
Rs.40,000/- in normal course in view of judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur
& Ors. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. reported in
AIR 2020 SC 3076 and there should be 10%
enhancement for every 3 years and as such,
claimant/petitioner No.1 would be entitled for Rs.44,000/-
under the head of loss of consortium. Since claimant No.2
is a sister of the deceased, she is not entitled for any
consortium.
12. Under the head of loss of estate the claimants
are entitled for Rs.16,500/- and the claimants would also
be entitled for funeral expenses of Rs.16,500/-. Hence, the
claimants would be entitled for total compensation of
Rs.22,69,400/- under the various heads as under:
NC: 2024:KHC:17828
Sl. No. Particulars Amount
1. Loss of Dependency Rs.21,92,400/-
2. Consortium to claimant No.1 Rs.44,000/-
3. Loss of estate Rs.16,500/-
4. Funeral Expenses Rs.16,500/-
Total Rs.22,69,400/-
Hence, the claimants/petitioner Nos.1 & 2 would be
entitled for compensation of Rs.22,69,400/- as against
Rs.15,82,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In view of these
facts and circumstances, the appeal needs to be allowed in
part and accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The claimant is held entitled for total
compensation of Rs.22,69,400/- as against
Rs.15,82,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC:17828
(iii) The enhanced compensation of Rs.6,87,400/-
(22,69,400-15,82,000) shall carry interest @
6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.
(iv) Respondent No.2-Insurance Company is
directed to deposit the entire compensation with
accrued interest thereon within a period of 6
weeks from the date of receipt of the certified
copy of this order.
(v) Appellant No.1 is entitled for 90% and appellant
No.2 is entitled for 10% of compensation
award.
(vi) Deposit and disbursement of compensation
amount shall be as per order of the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DS
