Karnataka High Court
The New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Smt Malana Bai on 24 October, 2011
Author: B.V.Nagarathna
Bench: B.V.Nagarathna
IN THE HIGH COUI.T OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD
DATEI) ris TIlE 24 DAY OF OCrOBF'R 2011
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRSJUSTICE B VNAGARATHNA
M A. Na.1212OQ7fMV)
Bet eetr
The New India Assuranre Co., Ltd
2' Floor Srinath Complex
New Cotton Market,
Keshwapur,
Hubli Repres nted b Regional Offi e
No 2 B, Unit Building Anntx
P Kahnga Rao Road
(Mission Road),
Bangaiore56OO2 7
By as duly constituted Anornev.
Appellant
fB Sr,GN.Rachur .Advocate)
And:
Srnt M lana Bai.
Aic 3b en
late L mmtj Hat e
Housleh ci
(h1ata Colon -
(tdag Road
H i Lii
/,Smt Srat
g d about years
iit C
Ho
2
D,o. late Ummap Kamble,
0cc: Student.
Chetana Colon'.
Gadag Road.
Hubli
4 Sn. Suxesh
Aged about 23 years,
5/0. late Ummaji Kamble,
0cc: Student.
Chetana Coloni,,
Gadag Road,
Hubh
5. Sri. Mahadri.
aged about 21 rears.
8/0. late Ummaji Kamble.
0cc: Student,
C hetana Colony
Gadag road
1
Hubli.
S Sri. Anand.
Major
,/o Sn Sha k lelag'ni,
) .0vinnoAi icksa;
8 Cross
62nd Stage.
HNo.F ii
Pra.sa' ad'.
csin t it.
1)1
A? n
Trjr.. ipp.il i' fa'4 and'i SrU. %fl sC 9 i't U' P'S
12aflSt 1 iuard datel 36.O'%.200' ,rnssed'"
rhc u'ktrn't't rn'
*fl •)( o; a p
1 'V 1j.al C ."ad t .1)1'
(I ':
d cn 1% ub ar p'r
1 0
3
This appeal ornin on for Admission this day, the Court
delivered the folloing
JUDGMEcT
Thts sppai is filed b the insurance ompanv assiiing
the judgment and award passed by MACT at Hubli in MVC
oJ0/2005. dated 18 5.2007. on the quantum of
compensation awarded b the Tribunal
2 lj is nnt in disput' that on Sri Umrnaji kamh1t
died n a road traffic accident that occurred on 04.08.2004
tthen he tas walking on Hubh Gadag Road when an auto
rkkshaw hearing No.KA-25 A 8684 dashed him He
s' ta 1 d ser n s nn ne and n s d dared dead in thf
i hi a hospit i. His eg rnpresentatives being n s w
rildi im f1ed 'i C laim artitna ,e k ng omarr inn n.
I U Ic ft It r( I ( fl( C II C hf
U r mc aupen1 hSUUii ( i
3 i: th sr'ttt U
--
1' n
e c i I ad I
--
U
r
(U (
D C
I 1) ID
CU )
2 I CD U CD 4
b
- CD
o' o
-- C 0
U, D i C
r+ CD p1
- c,,
CD z
CD
CD
I
cr p1 C
p1 p1 C3 CD
0 j CD CD 2
CD 1 p1 C U
C,, CD ; g
CD
9CD r
CD
-r CD
1 0
* C CD C) U,
+ * p1
C) 1
U C
! 0
CDQCD CD
----
cU
1 C p1
1 I c CD
C I II
() p1 C t:'i 0
CD CD / -r
ID
p1 Z CD
I U, r1 *
-
11 CD p1 >
CD
CD -r CD CD
ID CD
CD U 0
1 II
C, Cf p1 I
r'
-rr CD
C rt
- p1 -
-
U CD C
CL I CD
ag of the deceased (57 years), appropriate multiplier 11 anuld apply that the said multiplier had to be split 38 since the deceased gould have retired at 60 years and he was aged 57 years at the time of accident Therefore, compensation on the head of loss of dependency ought to have been awarded by following the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case Union of India and Others V/s K S Lakshmi Kumar and others, reported in ILR 2000 KAR 3809 He therefore would submit that this is a fit case where the intervention of this Court is call for reducing quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal 8 Per ontra learned rnine1 fnr h repôndri Ia man si pporti g the j dgment ann a passed b3 th b nal as Ia r ban e on a de si a f e Ape e Ca xC Ai dh n t )ff nci t r pr m es o89 o tend h o pe a n çi. r 7 CD j 0 CD c1 a CD
- CL Cl) C C) CD C) . C Cl) CL CD CL CD C) CD 1 Q C D CD CL CD j 7 7 CD CD CD
-3 0 C i CL CD o 7 CD CD (* X CD 0 CD Cl) 00 CD CD C 0 0 CL 0 C CL CL 0 CD ) 7 - C 0 C CD r+ rt 7 7 CL C) CD )) CD CIQ (Cl C) CD -t CD CD 7 7 o CD CD ) 4 i 0 C C CD 1) CD CD 7 o 0 CL C CL CD SI) CL D CD C SI) CD 0 CD CL CD i CD o C) rf 8) 8) )$ C) 3 J H p Go Go CD 3 a CD CD p p CT a Ci
-;
C) CD -4 CD - Ui 0 C 0
C) CD C) 0 P
4-- 9 - P
CD CD 4-- -4 -+ C)
t 0 Ii -4 0
C) C) -3 CD
C) -4
(3 81 P P
C) <4
j C) CD
C)
w
CD C)
r 3 r'i
J U) CD j r+ 4-,
03 0 Ci :i 0
L CD P CD CD ) 0
i) I
c cr
0 -+ 1 d a 0
CD Ci C)
C) -- r -3 0 Ci
CD 8 C) 81
-4 Cl
81 Ci
9 C) ) 3
4--
C)
4-
z 0
Ci Go
a
C'
p C) 4--
9 C)
P 0 CL Ci 0
Ci C)
I -- 8
i C) C)
Ci 0
P -4 ; $
CD 3 C)
4-, CD - C
-4 I Ci P I j r
4- 4- 8- r+ C) P
CD C) 8) -4
4)9 CD I - C
C) Go - C)
j 0 --, P Ci o
-- rn 0 0
- -- C)
4 Ci
C) CD 0 r+
CD Ci
i 0 CD I r+ 9 3
33 0 CD
i3 C
8
1 CD P Ci CDCD C)
CD qa.
Ci 0 --
- CD Go
p CD p t CD
I C) r Ci
i) 0
a rt C)
p CD
0 - C)
81
C) - 0
0
Ci C) Ci
hj 1 j
-- -t 8
C) - C) CD
C) p T'
4 Cl
8- -- 8) -4 CD -
C' CD
s3;'4 a z'
(a t 2 "l b
8
) a
b
a
S SE $4 it
00 0 P
Q1z4
t
0 eat
r 0 3
1%
P' 2 0 a 2 a
(1 --
(a GO' Q,
a B'
)
1• I? S
C
I
a
) C. -t a a
b.(
0
b ) g
;J
a a a *
V g
at D '1
a 0 j 84 tg
-9-
regard to the increments, DA that the deceased would have received. Having regard to Ex.P7, the salary slip monthly salary of Rs. 11,696/- is taken into consideration which is comprising of pay, DA, CCA, Special Pay and other allowances without making any deductions whatsoever. Therefore, the gross salary is taken into consideration.
13. Having regard to the age of the deceased and the date of retirement, it is noticed that he would have retired at 60 years in which event the total salary of the deceased to be considered for the period during which the deceased would have been in service is from the age of 57 years to 60 years i.e., three years and for the balance eight years, the pension has to be considered while arriving at the compensation on the head of loss of dependency. Normally, the pensionery amount would be 50% of the last drawn salary. This formula has been enunciated by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Union of India and Others Va JtaLakshml Kumar and others referred to above. In para Nos 16 and 17 of the judgment, it is stated as follows: 10
"16. Where the multiplier applicable is higher than the number of years of service which the deceased had before superannuation. the contribution to the family (or loss of dependencv cannot obviously be calculated with the reference to the salary income, for the entire period of multiplier. Let us illustrate. If a person aged 56 years (whose age of superannuation is 60 years) dies in an accident, leaving him surviving his wife and two children, how should the total loss of dependency be calculated? Let us assume that his salary was Rs6,00000 and after retirement, his pension would be Rs3,00000. Under the Davies method accepted and adopted by the Supreme Court, the applicable multiplier will be '9'. But, deceased would have got salary for only 4 years and then he would get only pension. If the deduction towards personal and living expenses of the deceased is one third, the contribution to the nt crng ne nenog f e eioc would have been Rs4,000/ (that is Rs600th 2000 But obviously the contribution to tite family \voulci not have been RaP 000 / after his retirement, that is from the 5 year onwards.
c rnsicn sP ers •d.e.ducting one ti.ird as persona/i and i.ivi.n.g
expenses, the contribution to the. family will only C II. -11- to be Rs.2,000/- per month. Therefore, the loss of dependency cannot be taken as Rs.4,000/- per month for the entire period of 9 years representing the multiplier. It has to be taken as Rs.4,000/- per month for the first four years (when he would have been in service) and Rs.2,000/- per month for the remaining five years (when he would have received pension). The method adopted in the above illustration will have to be applied in this case.
17. In this case the deceased was aged 53 years at the time of death and she would have attained the age of superannuation in about 7 years. The multiplier period is 9 years. After 7 years, the income would not have been Rs. 16,852.00 per month, but only roughly 50% of it as pension, and consequently the loss of dependency would have been 50% of Rs. 1,20,000.00 per annum. Thus, loss of dependency will have to be calculated with reference to the salary income for a period of 7 years and pension income for the remaining period of 2 years, as the multiplier period is '9 years'. The loss of dependency would therefore be Rs.l,20,000/00 x 7 plus Rs.60,000/00 x 2 i.e., Rs.9,60,000.00."
0I II, c:2 -:1
CD CD CD 00 0 ID)
CD C) P CD Ct CD
C CD CD
CD 0 CD
CD 00
CD o
t
CD CD
or CD 00
CD
-3
CD
CD 0 I
CD CD
D 0
CD C) ID)
CD CD CI)
oc CD 0
C, •- 00 tO
0 0
- CD CD 0 1 --
Cl) C,
' R CD
C, CD rt
+ Ci) CD
CD ID) ID)
CD
CD -- r
00
CD
CD tO
CD tO 00
1 0 CD 00
CD CD
rn CD tI C)
- - ) CD
CD tO C!)
o CD ID) CD
0 Ll) CD C) Ci,
' Ci) CD
00 CD C,)
11 P -tO
o C,
0 or
CD
0) Cl) CD 0
CD o ,
'- r+
O 0
0
-- -
or tO
CD 00 j 0
CD
r* CD Cf D JCD
) ci CD CD CD
CD rt j C
CD CD (J r CD
i) ; tO -Ci CD t: CD 0 CD 0
Court in the case of K,R,Madhusudan and others Vs Administrative Officer and anthers, it would be necessary to advert to t.h.e said decision also in the said case. The said appeal was assailting the order of this Court. This High Court had observed as follows in para 6 of the judgmen "6. The appellants and the respondents both appealed against the award of the Tribunal to the High Court of Karnataka, The appellants appeared for enhancement and the respondents for reduction of the amount awarded, The High Court, in its impugned judgment, reduced the compensation awarded by the Tribunal to the appellants to Rs, I i,82,OOO/. The relevant portion of High Court order reads as follows:
"The deceased was working as Senior Assistant in KEB getting a salary of Es, i5,642'. After effecting deductions towards income tax, the net salary of the dece.ased would be Rs14,OOO/. The mother and sons of the dece.ased have filed claim petition. 1/5 is to be deducted towards personal expenses. Rs,I 1,2OO/ would enure to the be.nefit of the dependants. The deceased was aged about 52 yeara. The deceased would have retired by 58 years .. After superannuation, the deceaard would get pensionary incoinc in a sum of Rs.6OOO/... 1/5 ft to be. deducted towards personal expenses.14
Rs480O/ would enure to the benefit of the dependants. Split multiplier would apply. After superannuation, multiplier 6 would apply. Therefore, the total loss of dependency before superannuation would be Rs. 806 400 / -
(Rs. 11200 (income) X 12 (months) X 6 (multiplier). The total loss of dependency from the pensionarv income would be Rs.3,45,600/ (Rs.4800/ (income) X 12 (months> X 6 (multiplier). The total loss of dependency would be Rs.11,52,000/ The petitioners are entitled for a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of expectancy and Rs, 10,000/- towards funeral expenses. in all the petitioners are entitled for a total sum of RsJ1,82,000/- as against Rs.14,27,496/- awarded by the Tribunal. The petItioners are entitled for interest at 6% p.a. and at para 14 has opined as follows:
"14. in. view of this evidence the Tribunal •should have considered the prospect of future income while corn... puting compensatioi. but the Tribunal has not done that. In the appeal.. which was filed Ipi t,he ap].Deilants before the High Caurt, the High. Court instead of n.ia.i.ntai..niitg the a.mou.nt o.f c.orn.ensation, gra,ntt..d by the Trib 1nai reduced the same. in. doing so. t...he H.igh (inui1 ha.d not given any reason, The High Court introduced the concept of split multiplier and departed from the multiplier used by the Tribunal without disclosing any reason therefore. The High Court has also not considered the clear and corroborative evidence about the prospect of future increment of the deceased. When the age of the deceased is between 5 and 55 years the multiplier is ii, which is specified in the II Column in the II Schedule in the Motor Vehicles Act, and the Tribunal has not committed any error by accepting the said multiplier. This Court also fails to appreciate why the High Court chose to apply the multiplier of 6"
16. On understanding the observations of the Hon t ble Apex Court, it becomes clear that the reason for applying split multiplier by this Court was not forthcoming in the reasons in the judument of this Court. Further, when the deceased was aged about. 53 years ai.d the multiplier of I I was to be applied, the High Court had applied only multiplier of 6 msca of ii. it is under those circumstances, the Hon'bic Apes. Court held that the Hihe Cou.rt had applied. tee concept of split multiplier with.out assigning saw reasons. The Apex Court rightly intervened, in t.he minter and held that the CD --4 j Z P) CD 0 crc S 4- D 4- 4-
-4 - --
-' D -4
i:I CD
- 4--
i C) -4
' d
r CD CD CD
CD
j U)
C) CD + C)
-4
r+ CD CD 4-
- -+
CD 4--
3 -- CD CD
-- CD gi CD 4--
C (i) U) 4- CD
g2 CD c- 0
U)
U) t1
4 CD C
CD CD
H
r+ CD CD -4-
1 CD U
4- ) + U) fr4
U) C-
U) 4- CD
4--
CD
- C) CD
CD 0 -t
U C)
L x -4
CD 5-
C) -4
CD r Z Z CD
z CD
) CD ) CD pi
L
8 0$
-4-
U) CD
i CD 0
4- 5-
gi C) Z i
r+ 4- C) r Cf
CD CD U)
4 CD
C - CD
.4 --
-4
rt j j
CD
r C cz C
U) r+ U)
1 CD C CD p
cxkCD U)
-i S
CD X CD 4-
j -
g)_ '
, -4 34
U) -- 1 CD _
Cl
+ Z - CD CD
C) fQ U) CD
CD / Jq
4-
C
4- j 4-)
4-
34 4-4 CD 34
CD CD
CD CD °
B B .4
Os -4
0 .4
a; 0
oa; o 0
0 I
ns
0
••1
0
•
.
Pt° p
'
0 m
0
CD
0
t4 •
CD CD b CD