Karnataka High Court
Ramachandrappa,M.S., Since Decd By ... vs The Manager on 8 August, 2013
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda
Bench: B.Sreenivase Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA
M.F.A.NO.8647/2008 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. Ramachandrappa M.S.,
S/o Siddaveerappa
(Died on 09-09-2007)
By his LR's
1 (a) Smt. Sharadamma
W/o Ramachandrappa M.S
Aged about 49 years
1 (b) Sri. Prakash
S/o Ramachandrappa M.S
Aged about 34 years
Both are residing at
Ramgondanahalli
Harapanahalli
Davanagere District. ...Appellants
(By Sri. Rajashekhar K, Advocate)
AND
1. The Manager,
United India Insurance Co., Ltd.,
1st Floor, Mallikarjuna Complex
Pravasi Mandira Road
Davanagere.
2
2. K.S.Devaraj
S/o Sankappa,
Aged about 45 years
Business, D.No.91/9
1st Main, D.C.M. Quarters
Davanagere. ...Respondents
(By Sri.B.Pradeep, Advocate for
Sri. A.N.Krishnaswamy for R-1;
Notice to R-2 D/w v/o dated 26.07.2013)
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of Motor
Vehicle Act against the judgment and award dated
4.3.2006 passed in MVC No.374/2005 (Old
No.492/2003) on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr.Dn)
and CJM and II Addl. MACT, Davanagere, partly
allowing the claim petition for compensation and
seeking enhancement of compensation.
This Appeal coming on for Orders this day, the
Court made the following:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
2. Heard, the appeal is admitted and with the consent of learned counsel appearing for parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
3
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.
4. As there is no dispute regarding death of the deceased Shivakumar in a road traffic accident occurred on 23.05.2003 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending car bearing registration No.KA-17-MC-466 by its driver and liability of the Car, the only point that arises for my consideration in the appeal is:
"whether quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?"
5. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perusing the judgment and award of the Tribunal, I am of the view that the 4 compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it is on the lower side and hence it is required to be enhanced.
6. The deceased was bachelor aged about 27 years at the time of his death in the accident. The claim petition was filed by his parents seeking compensation under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act. During the pendency of the claim petition father of deceased died and the claim petition was proceeded by his mother alone. The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award awarded the compensation of Rs.1,97,800/-. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, this appeal for enhancement of compensation was preferred by deceased father and mother of the deceased along with an application to permit the brother of deceased to come on record as legal representative of the father of the deceased in addition to the mother of the 5 deceased. The application was allowed and brother of deceased has come on record as legal representative of father of deceased. The claimants in support of their contentions that their deceased son was working as a Clerk in Banashankari Traders, Davanagere and was earning a sum of Rs.2,000/- per month and also earning by working as an assistant salesman at Subramanya Gas Agency on commission basis have examined the owner of the Banashankari Traders as PW-2 and clerk working at Subramanya Gas Agency as PW-3 and have produced gas agency letter, the salary certificate of the deceased at Exs. P5 and P6 respectively. PW-2 owner of Banashankari Traders, Davanagere, in his evidence has stated that deceased was working under him and he was paying him salary of Rs.2,000/-. But in his cross-examination he has stated that he has not maintained the attendance and wage register. PW-3 has stated in his evidence that there is no document to show that deceased was 6 working as gas agent and there is no document to show that deceased was supplying about 3,000 gas cylinders to several consumers. Therefore, considering his age as 27 years, year of accident as 2003 and he was working at Banashankari Traders, Davanagere and also doing some other work to eke out his livelihood and keeping in mind his future prospects of life, his income can be assessed at Rs.4,000/- per month. Since, the deceased was a bachelor, 50% of his income has to be deducted towards his personal expenses and multiplier 14 has to be applied based on the age of his mother. Therefore, the 'loss of dependency' works out to Rs.3,36,000/- (4000 x 1/2 x 12 x 14) and it is awarded.
In addition to that a sum of Rs.45,000/- is awarded under various conventional heads. 7
8. Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following compensation:-
a) Loss of dependency - Rs.3,36,000 Conventional heads - Rs. 45,000
------------------
Rs.3,81,000/-** Less: compensation awarded by the Tribunal - Rs.1,97,800
-------------------
TOTAL Rs.1,83,200
-------------------
9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated herein above. The claimants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.1,83,200/-* with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation.
10. Out of the enhanced compensation, 50% of the amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be invested in fixed deposit in the name of mother of the deceased in any Nationalised Bank/Scheduled Bank/Post Office for a period of 9 years. Remaining * corrected vide chamber order dt.21-1-14 ** Inserted vide chamber order dt.21-1-14 8 amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be released in favour of both the claimants in equal proportion.
11. No order as to costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE DR