Karnataka High Court
Jayalakshmi vs Kalavathi S Chatra on 14 March, 2014
Author: N.K.Patil
Bench: N.K.Patil
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2014
:PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.PATIL
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PRADEEP.D.WAINGANKAR
M.F.A.No. 8600 OF 2012 (MV)
Between:
1. Jayalakshmi,
Aged about 26 years,
W/o. Late Ramesh.V.
2. Master Purushotham,
Aged about 7 years,
S/o. Late Ramesh.V.
3. Master Pavan Kumar,
Aged about 5 years,
S/o. Late Ramesh.V.
4. Krishnamma,
Aged about 59 years,
W/o. Veerabhadrappa.
5. Veerabhadrappa,
Aged about 61 years,
S/o. Late Veerappa.
Since Appellant Nos.2 & 3 are minor,
Both are rep. by guardian mother
I appellant.
2
All are R/o. Malligenahalli,
Maidal Post, Bhadravathi Taluk,
Shimoga District.
...Appellants
(By Sri. H. Pavana Chandra Shetty, Advocate)
And :
1. Kalavathi.S. Chatra,
(Major),
W/o. Sachidananda Chatra,
Sri. Durgamma Main Road,
Kundapur, Udupi District.
2. The Oriental Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Kundapura Branch, Mastikatte,
Kundapura,
Rep. by its Branch Manager.
...Respondents
(By Sri. O. Mahesh, Advocate for R2;
Notice to R1 dispensed with v/o. dated 14/03/2014)
This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of MV Act against the
judgment and award dated: 13/07/2012 passed in MVC No.
793/2011 on the file of the Presiding Officer, Fast Track
Court and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kundapura,
partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and
seeking enhancement of compensation.
This M.F.A. coming on for Orders this day,
N.K. PATIL J, delivered the following:
:J U D G M E N T:
Though this matter is listed today for orders, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for both the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal. 3
2. This appeal by the appellants-claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 13/07/2012 passed in MVC No. 793/2011, by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kundapura, (hereinafter referred to as ' Tribunal' for short), for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that, a sum of `5,69,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till payment, as against the claim `28,65,000/- on account of the death of the deceased Sri. Ramesh.V, in the road traffic accident is inadequate.
3. In brief, the facts of the case are:
The appellants are the wife, minor children and parents of the deceased. They filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents, on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident, contending that, on 21.6.2011 at about 19.25 4 hours on Kattemakki, Shankaranarayana village, Kundapura Taluk, when the deceased was travelling as a passenger in Sri. Durgamba bus bearing Reg.No.KA.20.8778 from Halady to Kundapura side, at that time, the driver of the said bus drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and due to over speed, lost control over it and dashed against the tree. Due to which, deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to the same on the spot.
4. It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 35 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, working as conductor in Sri. Durgamba Motors, Kundapura and getting the income of `9,000/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family by contributing his entire earnings to the family. Due to his untimely death, appellants have suffered financial loss as they have lost their bread earner, apart from mental shock and agony. 5
5. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of `5,69,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till payment.
6. Being dis- satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement of compensation.
7. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for Insurer.
8. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, at the outset is that, the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal at `3,500/- per month is on lower side and it needs to be enhanced, on the ground that, he was working as a conductor and `9,000/- per month and dependants are 6 his wife, children and parents of the deceased and therefore, his income may be reassessed at least rupees 7,000/- to 7,500/- per month. Further, he submits that, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of consortium and loss of love and affection is on lower side and it needs to be enhanced. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified by awarding reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency and towards conventional heads..
9. As against this, learned counsel appearing for the Insurer, inter-alia, contended and substantiated that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, it does not call for interference.
10. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and after careful perusal of the material available on record at threadbare, including the 7 impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our consideration is:
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?
11. The occurrence of the accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. Further, it is not in dispute that deceased was aged about 35 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, working as conductor in Sri. Durgamba Motors and the dependants are his wife, aged about 25 years, children are aged about 6 and 4 years and parents are aged about 55 and 66 years and on account of his untimely death, they suffered financial apart from mental shock and agony. Further, it emerges that, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at `3,500/- per month, which is on lower side and it needs to be enhanced. Having regard to the age and occupation of the deceased and the year of accident, the dependants, we re-assess his income at `6,500/- per month instead 8 of `3,500/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal. Out of which, if 1/4th (`1,625/-) is deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, his net income comes to `4,875/- per month. Accepting the multiplier of '16' adopted by the Tribunal taking the age of the deceased as 35 years as just and proper, we re-determine the loss of dependency at `9,36,000/- (`4,875/- x 12 x 16) instead of `5,04,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded.
12. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we award a sum of `50,000/- towards loss of consortium, `50,000/- towards ;loss of love at the rate of `10,000/- each, `10,000/- towards loss of estate and `10,000/- towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses. In all, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of `10,56,000/- instead of `5,69,000/- .awarded by the Tribunal. There would be an enhancement of `4,87,000/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization. 9
13. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 13/07/2012 passed in MVC No.793/2011, by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kundapura, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of `4,87,000/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
The 2nd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of `4,87,000/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and award.
Immediately on such deposit by the Insurer, out of the enhanced compensation of `4,87,000/-, a sum of `1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of the appellant No.1 in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, 10 for a period of 10 years and renewable by another 10 years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.
A sum of `1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the names of each of the appellant Nos.2 and 3 in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, till they attain the age of 30 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant No.1 to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically, for the welfare of appellant Nos. 2 and 3 till they attain 21 years and thereafter, from 22 years to 30 years, they are at liberty to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically..
A sum of `1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of the appellant No.4 in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, for a period of 10 years and renewable by another 10 years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically. 11
The remaining sum of `87,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos.1, 4 and 5 in equal proportion immediately.
Draw the award, accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-) JUDGE tsn*