Karnataka High Court
Sunitha C R vs The Manager on 19 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:46698
MFA No. 3801 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3801 OF 2024(MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SUNITHA C. R.,
W/O LATE J. C. HANUMANTHE GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
R/O A GUDUGANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SHATHIGRAMA HOBLI,
HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-573201.
2. YATHEESH H.,
S/O LATE C R HANUMANTHE GOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS,
R/O A GUDUGANAHALLI VILLAGE,
SHATHIGRAMA HOBLI,
HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-573201.
SINCE APPELLANT NO.2 IS MINOR,
HE IS REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER,
Digitally signed by
AASEEFA AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. SUNITHA C. R.,
PARVEEN SHE IS THE FIRST APPELLANT
Location: HIGH ...APPELLANTS
COURT OF (BY SRI. GIRISH B. BALADARE, ADVOCATE)
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. THE MANAGER,
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
1ST FLOOR, KRUTHIKA ARCADE,
N.R CIRCLE, H.N. PURA ROAD,
HASSAN DISTRICT-573201.
2. KUMARA,
S/O LATE SHAMBE GOWDA,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:46698
MFA No. 3801 of 2024
MAJOR,
NEAR VIJAYA BANK,
DYAVAMMA EXTENSION,
H N PURA ROAD, CHANNAPATTANA,
HASSAN TALUK-573 201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN REDDY N.A., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2- NOTICE DISPENSED WITH, V/O. DATED 30.08.2024)
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.02.2023 PASSED IN
MVC NO. 889/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, HASSAN, 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 DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.Girish.B.Baladare, learned counsel for the
appellants as well as Sri.Mallikarjun Reddy.N.A who
represents Sri.Pradeep.B, learned counsel on record for
respondent No.1.
2. The first appellant being the wife and the
second appellant being the son of the deceased
J.C.Hanumanthegowda (herein after be referred to as 'the
deceased' for brevity) who died in a road traffic accident
NC: 2024:KHC:46698
that occurred on 10.03.2020 moved an application
claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- in total. The
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hassan which dealt with
the case as MVC No.889/2020 rendered orders on
07.02.2023 awarding a sum of Rs.16,30,060/- as
compensation. Projecting that they are entitled to a higher
sum, the present appeal is filed.
3. Arguing the matter, Sri.Girish.B.Baladare,
learned counsel for the appellants contends that the
deceased was working as plumber by the date of accident
and was earning Rs.30,000/- p.m. However, the Tribunal
took the notional income of the deceased as Rs.13,000/-
p.m. and awarded very meager sum as compensation.
Learned counsel also states that the Tribunal did not even
add future prospects which is against the mandate of law.
Learned counsel further contends that the accident
occurred in the year 2020 and for the relevant period, the
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the
notional income as Rs.14,500/- p.m. for settlement of
NC: 2024:KHC:46698
claims and at least the said figure should have been
considered by the Tribunal.
4. Sri.Mallikarjuna Reddy representing respondent
No.1 though contends that the compensation granted is
justifiable, fairly submits that non adding of future
prospects is unjust.
5. Admittedly, there is no evidence on record to
show that the deceased was plumber by occupation and he
was earning Rs.30,000/- p.m. as contended by the
appellants herein. However, considering the submission
that is made regarding the notional income to be taken,
this Court considers desirable to take the notional income
of the deceased as Rs.14,500/- p.m.
6. It is not in dispute that the deceased was aged
about 37 years by the date of accident. Therefore, as per
the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and
Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, 40% of the actual
earnings are required to be added towards future
NC: 2024:KHC:46698
prospects. Thus the Tribunal committed grave error by
omitting to add future prospects.
7. As the dependents are two in number, 1/3rd of
the earnings of the deceased are required to be deducted
towards personal and living expenses which the deceased
would have incurred for himself had he been alive. Also
the appropriate multiplier to be applied as per the decision
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Sarla
Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and
Another reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 is '15'.
8. Thus the compensation which the appellants are
entitled to under the head of loss of dependency is as
under:
Notional monthly income Rs.14,500/-
Annual income Rs.1,74,000/-
On adding 40% towards future Rs.2,43,600/-
prospects
On deducting 1/3rd towards Rs.1,62,400/-
personal and living expenses
Loss of dependency, on applying Rs.24,36,000/-
appropriate multiplier 15
NC: 2024:KHC:46698
9. Thus the appellants are entitled to
Rs.24,36,000/- under the head 'loss of dependency'. Also,
as the accident occurred and the deceased died in the year
2020, the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.16,500/-
towards funeral expenses and Rs.16,500/- towards loss of
estate. Further the first appellant being the wife of the
deceased is entitled to Rs.44,000/- towards loss of spousal
consortium. The second appellant being the son of the
deceased is entitled to Rs.44,000/- under the head loss of
parental consortium.
10. Thus the compensation which the appellants are
entitled to under different heads is as follows:
Sl.
Description Amount
No
1 Loss of dependency Rs.24,36,000
2 Funeral expenses Rs.16,500
3 Loss of estate Rs.16,500
4 Loss of spousal consortium Rs.44,000
5 Loss of parental consortium Rs.44,000
Total Rs.25,57,000
NC: 2024:KHC:46698
11. The Tribunal through the impugned order
awarded a sum of Rs.16,30,060/- only as compensation.
However, the forgoing discussion makes it clear that the
appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.25,57,000/- as
compensation. Hence, the appeal is disposed of with the
following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The compensation that is granted by the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hassan
through orders in MVC No.889/2020 dated
07.02.2023 is enhanced from
Rs.16,30,060/- to Rs.25,57,000/-.
(iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at
the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of
petition till the date of deposit.
(iv) The appellants are not entitled to any
interest on the enhanced sum for the
period of delay of 389 days as per orders
in I.A.No.1/2024.
NC: 2024:KHC:46698
(v) Respondent No.1 is directed to deposit the
enhanced sum within a period of 8(eight)
weeks from the date of receipt of copy of
this order.
(vi) The apportionment made applies to
enhanced sum as well.
(vii) On deposit, the first appellant is permitted
to withdraw her share along with accrued
interest.
(viii) The amount that fell to the share of
appellant No.2 shall be invested by the
Tribunal in any interest yielding fixed
deposit scheme of any nationalized bank
until the second appellant attains the age
of majority. On his attaining the age of
majority, the second appellant is entitled
to withdraw the same along with accrued
interest.
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
NS
CT:TSM
