G Vijayakumari vs T Mohan Subramanyam on 7 October, 2009

[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

G Vijayakumari vs T Mohan Subramanyam on 7 October, 2009

Equivalent citations: 2010 (1) AIR KANT HCR 281, 2010 A I H C 1317, (2011) 1 TAC 515, (2010) 4 ACJ 2736, (2010) 2 CIVLJ 458

Bench: N.K.Patil

 4

«ff/--"

IN arms: HIGH corner or KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009
:PRESE1\E'I':
THE HON'BLE MR..ms'r1c1: N.K.PAT1L_" 
AND    .
THE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE   
M.F.A.No. 6532 OFAZOGB6  G' . . " 
BETWEEN: V   V V'  2
1 Smt. G Vijayakumaﬁ, G A  '
W/0. Late G F R Jay'a_raj_,  V . "
Aged about 42 Years.;_ ' G

2 Sri. G Emzﬁanuezﬁ, : 

s/:5; Late CV1'?  Jaga:a;.'  
Aged -abot3.t--«i2_V3  __ --

3  G ' J'.
S/0. Late G F R~.-}a'yaraj,
 'Aged abcuftiii Years.

 V. G  G'Micheavﬁ5remkumar,

  jl'  (By S11: 5 s Haveri, Advocate)

   j E3,/Gc');  M RJayaraj,
 "Ag:'er1"ab.0L1t 19 Years.

 Aii 'aréV' residing at No.P6,
..Survey of India Quarters,
' A Kefamangaia II Block.
A 'G   Bangal0re--«34.

... Appellants



1 T Mohan Subramanyam,
S/0. TTangavelu,
Residing at No.76/B, T.R.Layout,
Mys0re-- 10.   _

2 The New India Assurance Co.7,Ltd,",* .. 
No.73. I Floor, Nazarbad, ' "
Mys0re--10,  
Represented by its Manager)'

it it " -- . ._ .. . Revspohdents

(R-1 Served;      
Sri: K Suryanarayana Advocate for = "

This MFA 1'§s~'iiied'- AU;/_s' 1'7_3{_1)" emarv Act against the
judgment aﬂd"«<aWardVdated~r_g1'2;'l_'.2iO06 passed in MVC
No.1733/2o05~:ﬁ__ en the ._fi1'e"_'r_)_f" the 'X111 Addl. Small Causes
Judge. _.--Me:r'1'r3.er,"' i:;MAC'I;--._ Melzropblitan Area, Bangalore
(SCCH;NO.15'y.i'V.. _pa1ftiy_ "a1lov_vi:1g the claim petition for
comperisatioriva:t1d.t's.ee}siﬁgA_enhancement of compensation.

This"  for Admission this day, N.K.
PATIL , J , deiivered fthetfoilowingz

 "" I-JUDG MENT:
   '  on merits.

A  2.v'.-7]"ii:;i..sAdV.appeal is directed against the judgment

 ..aiii7ard dated 12.1.2006 passed in MVC

 egi"i1\iee.:§*33/2005 by the learned X111 Additional smaii

.,,C.auses Judge and MACT, Court of Small Causes,



6

SCCi~I-15, Bangalore, (hereinafter referred to as
Tribunal' for short).

3. By its judgment and award, the TribunaI"»has

awarded a sum of Rs.6,49,200/-- with 

p.a., from the date of petition till the 

Being aggrieved by that, appeiiantsdp j; theatre' 

appeal, seeking enharicemerrton the"'grournti'VVthat,  the 

amount awarded by the  is inad-e_c;L1ateV;fg
4. In brief the  of th,--_c.tca.Sey'."are:

The appellant   'appellant Nos.

2 to  thethdetcteased Srai. Jayaraj. The
appel1arrts'-- have."u~~"claim petition before the

'i'1'ib1:.na.I,  corripensation of Rs.30,00,000/-- on

'd V. 'ofthpe death' of the deceased Sn'. J ayaraj, in the

 e--acciderrt:'«vifIii.ch'.1~occurred on 29.12.2004 at about 9.30

 Whe:13'he was proceeding towards his residence at

K."°~..V:"I§oraniar;gala on Hosur Road on his Honda Activa

'' . 'scooter and when he came near Sri. Ayyapaswamy

  ~»teh*1p1e junction, at that tr e, a tipper lorry bearing No.

KA--09--C--2525 driven by i driver came at high speed in

a"m¢WM___M_M__,,,,_...,;n



a rash and negligent manner and dashed against his
scooter, due to which deceased fell down and sustained

head injury and his scooter was damaged and.

succumbed to injuries on 31.12.2004.  

Sri. Jayaraj was working as Diraftsniéanvvlé at 

Survey of India and drawing  _

Rs.12,l99/M per month asV'o.i_i"~t_he d'ate tvhe~--.haecident."'l

The said claim petition.' hadi"eoriie'V"up for consideration
before the Tribunal  '!_'ribunal, after

hearing both.   the oral and

 hasdhlavllowed the said claim
petitiori'«ii'1"paIt.VV_atiVd.ll'aiiiai'ded a sum Rs.6,49,200/~ as

compensation'u'nder."dii'ferent heads with interest at 6%

. V.ﬂ"ip.ga';",«:.ff*oin dat'é""§f petition till the date of deposit.

   by the said judgment and award, the

appe11a_iits,l'.7~~' have presented this appeal, seeking

it  Vnenhanceinent of compensation.

it  5. The principal submission canvassed by the

  "i-Iearried counsel appearing for appellants is that, the

Tribunal has committe an error in taking the net

i .......__..mw---------=
K
;
1



income of the deceased for calculating loss of

dependency. Further he submitted that the 

deductions is only towards Professional  

tax. He also submitted that the :'Fribu«nal'..phas 

an error in not taking the future  of deCe--afse»d'~_

as held by the Apex Court i1'1v..,:.ti1e case of V

and others Vs. Del!iz'.__ and
another reported in   Further, he
submitted   l-cornriiitted an error in
not  "rnedical expenses for
three ' noltllnaéwarding any amount
towardsthe  to the scooter. Therefore,

he su-bmitteil the irnpugned judgment and award

'l V.  passed by the  is liable to be modiﬁed.

 V'G:*~.§erf'-contra, learned counsel appearing for

second __v'respondent-- Insurance Company, inter-alia,

that, the Tribunal on proper consideration of .._A't~}f_1Ve'-oral and documentary evidence available on file, has

-'El'v\ff8_1'(i€d just and reasonable amount and therefore, it does not call for interference. However, he fairly

41..., / submitted that, the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of dependency appears to be inadequate and requires consideration in View of the law by the Apex Court.

7. After careful consideration»-of the vsubiniss.ii3n's. . made by learned counsel appearing bothilihe ._ and after careful perusal of tlieirnpugned award passed by the._"l'ribuna.}ll,:'* the ohlyqioint that arises for out consideration l it b the by the Tribunal, tow*_ards 1loss_...ojfVdepe'ndency is in accordanefe 8l.l'AVft'erl of the material available on record, it dispute that, deceased Sri. Jayaraj

- 2 i.,_,di¢"d accountlolflthe head injury sustained by him in occurred on 29.12.2004 at about near Sri. Ayyappaswamy Temple junction to "the rash and negligent driving of the Tipper lorry be'a::lhg No. KA--09--C--2525 by its driver. it is also not in _,.dtsp11te that, the deceased was working as Draftsman Grade--Ii at Survey of I ' , Central Government Geo-- WWW"

t 5' spatial Data Centre, Saijapura Road, Koramangala 11 Stage, Bangaiore and drawing gross salary of Rs. 12, 199/- per month. The permissible dedu is only towards Professional and Income Rs.12,199/--, if a sum of Rs.1.00(3'/1 tcweeardsi is deducted, the net income of the 1deceased Rs.11,199/-- per month. Th'evm.::d--eceased_Vwas it 48 V years at the time of 'his death cIairn'ants are entitled for future incorneldof 30% of the net income dravme:e1'by thegdeceased'-a,.s__V(3n the date of his death,:v'in'--yie*ar»Vof by the Apex Court in th§'~.€/as-eedof and others Vs. Delhi Transport Eﬂorperai:-ioéii. and another reported in '' V'''i2o09CAccI'i~ ..1ﬂ29£SA,V"y\}herein, it is held at para~11 that, t3C3?z_iaVo'fs'alary is to be added to the actual saiary income ___*of deceased towards future prospects, 't"'4"*--.Vei"W.herethe deceased had a permanent job and he was Jbeiow' the age of 50 years. In the instant case, the deceased was aged about 48 years and he was i' working as a Draftsman §E:rade--II at Survey of India,. m'#w_W_M_,,,,,,_,...

f 3 30% of net income of the deceased works out to Rs.3,359.7O and total income comes to Rs.14,55_8.7O (11,199 + 3,359.70= 14,558.70) per monthf-i:'y""«.'ylp.'l't"2e Tribunal has committed an error in dedudctingid towards the personal expenses of"the sdedceaseds o11i't1'1e ground that, the dependents arebfotdi-r are the Wife and children of ought to have deducted tr/'4Ehjvt.:'jtofWardsA'th'e'"persona1 expenses of the deceasedin of number of dependents. of miifd/iélfh is deducted towards fiersdinalsjeztpensevswof the deceased, the net inCome7 VVcornes.VV.'t_o>.d"Rs';"1.G,919.O3 per month. The appropriate.' Multiplierdxd"applicable is '13', since the . .ﬂ"dee'ease'd agedmabout 48 years at the time of death. total loss of dependency comes to Rs;'i1t7,Qv3r,3s8d.68 (10,919.o3 x 12 x 13=17,03,368.68) 'is; rounded off to Rs.17,03,368/- instead of Rs. 84/-- awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it V " -is awarded.

,~

9. So far as the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards other conventional heads i.e. transportation of dead body, funeral and obsequies ceremonies,",V:los's:"of consortium, loss of love and affection expectancy of life is just and reasonable and it aggsijm; call for interference.

10. The submission~vr.ﬁo--f, the'---learnedﬂucounsel it appearing for the ap"pellants" not awarded any amount meVdi.cal'_'..eXpenses and damages to 3tht3:.£lz'€hlC1€g the appellants have ' documents to show the amountspent medical expenses and also ,toward"s repair of the scooter and therefore, haswrightly not awarded any amount Therefore, the finding of the Tribunal inthis regardl is just and proper and it does not call for " " ' -- V "interferersice.

l 7&1}. Having regard to the facts and circumstances the case as stated above, e impugned judgment and award passed by the T ' is liable to be modiﬁed. The total compensation payable comes to Rs. 17,53.368-- and the break-- up is as follows:

1. Towards loss of dependency Rs. 17,0ee,j3as _

2. Towards transportation of Dead body, funeral and Obsequies ceremonies Rs... T

3. Towards loss of co'nsoI'tiurn Rs. "£04,000;/,~

4. Towards loss oflove 7 " ' ' " ' T and affection 'Raﬁ _

5. Towards loss of expectaney.___of 1ife.V_ " Rs. 1;0_,_()OQ§/-- T

6. Towards loss of estate TXKOOOZ :

'__i'1'otal_ Re..:'i7,53 ,368/-

12. Accordingly}'theT'-a;3p;3aI--Vf,is':'allowed and the impugned judgnient and' 'by the Claims rrnoieiaiiinio /zoos" stands modified, granting a eornperisation ,o'f1§a.'1:{;5»3,~3e8/- instead of Rs.6,49,18-4/~ [enhsI_ncenrten_t being': Rs..11,04,184/--) with interest at T V' - 69/oo.a.e;t from thedate of petition till its realization.

i"1nsu3:ance company is directed to deposit the coinpensatinn amount with interest, within six weeks from date of receipt of the copy of this judgment and T award.

Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs} 1,04,184/--, appellant No.1 shail be entitled for a ,1], sum of Rs.6,54,184/~with interest. Out of which, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-- with interest shall be invested in the fixed deposit in any nationalized or scheduled bank in the name of the appellant No.1 for a period of ﬁve years. The .a'pp_'e.l_lant No.1 shall be entitled to withdraw the interestfaeernvedll ~ it. The remaining amount of" Rs. .4_'witli1 Ru interest shall be released in favoifir _tlie pp The appellant Nos.2 are eiititlgfj of V which Rs.1,50,000/- each, sha3l""'b.e_:'--invested "in the fixed deposit in the name the to 4 for a period of fiVe"i'ye§ijlfs shal-{Vibe entitled to Withdraw ilnterestl it qnarterly. The appellant Nos.

2 to shaltbe Withdraw the up to date :_iIi'&r_est .a_4c}eI'§.1.tCd on their share. V accordingly.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court