Karnataka High Court
Umadevi vs M/S Thirumala Cabs on 13 February, 2024
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:6093
MFA No. 7053 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7053 OF 2021 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. UMADEVI
W/O LATE GIRISH T R
NOW AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
2. PUNITH GOWDA S
S/O LATE GIRISH T R
NOW AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS
MINOR REP BY HIS MOTHER
N/g SMT UMADEVI
3. SMT GANGALAKSHMAMMA
W/O RAJANNA
NOW AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS
Digitally signed
by AMBIKA H B
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
Location: HIGH
COURT OF DODDABELE POST,
KARNATAKA THYAMONDLU HOBLI,
NELAMANGALA TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT,
AND ALSO RESIDING AT
DASANAPURA VILLAGE,
BEHIND PANCHAYATH OFFICE,
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RANGEGOWDA N R.,ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:6093
MFA No. 7053 of 2021
AND:
1. M/S THIRUMALA CABS,
PROP M SUNIL KUMAR,
AGED MAJOR,
R/AT, NO 320/4, A.V.ROAD,
KALSIPALAYAM, BANGALORE.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
SUBARAM COMPLEX MG ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY.,ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.09.2021 PASSED IN MVC
NO. 1652/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SMALL
CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-11),
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 06.09.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal') in MVC No. 1652/2020. This appeal is founded on the premises of -3- NC: 2024:KHC:6093 MFA No. 7053 of 2021 inadequacy of compensation. Hence, the appellants seeks enhancement of compensation.
2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case as under;
That on 13.03.2020 at about 11.50 p.m., Sri. Girish T. R., was waiting to cross the road on left side of road on NH-48, Bengaluru-Tumkuru Highway, Near Bhudhihal Gate U Turn, Kasaba Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District. At that time, the Orange Private Bus bearing Reg No.KA-51-AD-1708 came at a high speed in rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased. As a result of the impact of the accident, he was sustained severe injuries and died at the spot. He was shifted to a Gov. Hospital, Nelamangala and the claimants incurred huge financial expenditure of Rs.80,000/-.
3.1 It was stated that the deceased Girish T. R. was hale and healthy and was aged about 34 years and was working as coolie doing loading and unloading work in a Private Transport Company and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the claimants -4- NC: 2024:KHC:6093 MFA No. 7053 of 2021 who are the legal representatives of deceased Girish T. R being widow, minor child and mother have been put to severe financial difficulties and emotional trauma. Hence, the claimants filed a claim petition seeking compensation.
3.2 It is the case of the claimants that the case has been registered against the driver of the orange bus bearing No. KA-51-AD-1708 and respondent No.1 is the owner and respondent No.2 is the Insurance Company and hence, claimants filed a claim petition seeking compensation.
3.3 On service of notice, respondent No.1 was placed ex-parte. Respondent No.2 - Insurance Company appeared through it counsel and filed objections statement denying the claim of the claimant including age, avocation and income and the materials attributed as against the driver of private bus, wherein it had admitted the issuance of policy in favour of first respondent and the liability if any in subject to the terms and conditions of the same policy. It was also pleaded that there was no Zebra crossing to cross the road and it is also pleaded that negligence is of the deceased himself and accordingly, respondent No.2 has prayed for dismissal of the petition. -5-
NC: 2024:KHC:6093 MFA No. 7053 of 2021 3.4 On the basis of pleadings, the tribunal framed relevant issues for consideration.
3.5 In order to substantiate the issues and to establish the case, the claimant No.1 was examined as PW1 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to P16. On the other hand, respondents not adduced their evidence.
3.6 On the basis of materials evidence both oral and documentary and hearing the submission of learned counsel for both the parties, the tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.28,38,000/- with interest 9% per annum to the claimants and directed the respondent No.2 - Insurance Company to deposit the same within one month.
3.7 Being aggrieved by the meager compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimants are before this Court challenging the impugned judgment and award.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent - Insurance Company submits that the tribunal has rightly awarded just and reasonable compensation, which does not call for interference. Therefore, on these grounds, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. -6-
NC: 2024:KHC:6093 MFA No. 7053 of 2021
5. Having heard learned counsel for the claimant and learned counsel for respondent - Insurance Company have produced impugned Judgment and award in the same that claimants have produced Exs.P1 to P16 out of Ex.P1 to Ex.P10 are the police records and Ex.P11 to Ex.P16 are the records to show the age, relationship and education of the claimants. Ex.P1 to P10 evidences the fact of FIR being filed against the driver of the offending vehicle and Charge Sheet also has been laid against the driver of the offending vehicle and no materials are placed to counter of the same. Therefore, negligence is rightly attributed against the driver of the offending vehicle.
6. Now coming to the question of age, avocation, income, it is seen income is taken by the tribunal at Rs.15,000 p.m and it is quite reasonable and does not call for interference. The age of the claimant was 34 years. The tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier at '16' which does not call for interference.
7. It has also awarded future prospects at 40% in addition to the income as future prospects and deducted 1/3rd of the income, which also does not call for interference. Hence the income shall be taken as Rs.14,000/- per month -7- NC: 2024:KHC:6093 MFA No. 7053 of 2021 (Rs.15,000 + 40% - 1/3rd). Hence loss of dependency would be Rs.26,88,000/- (Rs.14,000/- x 12 x 16). The tribunal rightly calculated, which also does not call for interference.
8. Towards loss of consortium, the tribunal has awarded totally Rs.40,000/- per person and towards loss of estate and funeral expenses, tribunal has awarded Rs.30,000/-. The small point for interference in this case would be awarding of 10% escalation on the loss of consortium and loss of conventional heads which is in accordance with judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680. Therefore, the same would be computed as Rs.1,32,000/- (Rs.1,20,000/- + 10%) and Rs.33,000/- (Rs.30,000/- + 10%). Therefore, Rs.15,000/- is the only addition granted in the present claim petiton.
9. In view of the above, the claimants would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.28,53,000/- as against the Rs.28,38,000/- as mentioned in the table below;
-8- NC: 2024:KHC:6093 MFA No. 7053 of 2021 Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency 26,88,000-00 Pain and Sufferings 1,32,000-00 (Spousal consortium, Parental Consortium to two Children and Filial Consortium) Loss of Amenities 33,000-00 TOTAL 28,53,000-00 Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed-in-part; ii) The judgment and award dated 26.02.2021 passed
by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC No. 981/2018 is modified;
iii) The claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.28,53,000/- as against the Rs.28,38,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. -9- NC: 2024:KHC:6093 MFA No. 7053 of 2021
iv) The enhanced compensation amount shall be paid by the respondent - Insurance Company with interest @ 6% p.a within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;
Sd/-
JUDGE THM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41