Karnataka High Court
Namadev S/O Tukaram Rupanur vs Pramodkumar S/O Chotubai Desai Anr on 28 March, 2014
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA BENCH
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2014
BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. PACHHAPURE
MFA NO.31951 OF 2011 (MV)
C/W
MFA NO.31857 OF 2011 (MV) &
MFA NO.31886 OF 2011 (MV)
MFA NO.31951 OF 2011
BETWEEN:
Ketri @ Sunil
S/o Narayan Bajabalkar
Age: 27 years,
Occ: Driver (now nil),
R/o Tikota, Tal. & Dist. Bijapur.
... Appellant
(By Sri. Babu H. Metagudda, Advocate)
AND:
1. Pramodkumar
S/o Chotubai Desai,
Age: 48 years, Occ: Business
Owner of Goods Truck bearing
Reg. No.MH-12/AQ-999,
R/o Desai Estate, Jalochi,
Near Market, Tq. Baramati,
Dist. Pune, Maharashtra State.
2
2. The Branch/Divisional Manager,
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Wing No.3, Nagar Parishad Udyog Bhavan,
Bhiswan Chowk, Baramati - 413 102.
Present adress
The Branch Manager,
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Hanamashetti Building,
Gurukul Road, Bijapur.
... Respondents
(Sri. S.S. Aspalli, Advocate for R2;
Notice to R1 dispensed with V/O Dtd. 12.02.2014)
This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of M.V. Act against
the judgement and award dated 28.06.2011 passed in
MVC No.1629/2008 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal No.IV, Bijapur, partly allowing the
claim petition and seeking enhancement of
compensation.
MFA NO.31857 OF 2011
BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Sanika
W/o Shankar Bandagar,
Age: 24 years,
Occ: Household work.
2. Mainabai W/o Baburai Bandagar,
Age: 48 years,
Occ: Household work.
Both are residents of Tikota,
Tal. & Dist. Bijapur.
... Appellants
(By Sri. Babu H. Metagudda, Advocate)
3
AND:
1. Pramodkumar
S/o Chotubai Desai,
Age: 48 years, Occ: Business
Owner of Goods Truck bearing
Reg. No.MH-12/AQ-999,
R/o Desai Estate, Jalochi,
Near Market, Tq. Baramati,
Dist. Pune, Maharashtra State.
2. The Branch/Divisional Manager,
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Wing No.3, Nagar Parishad Udyog Bhavan,
Bhiswan Chowk, Baramati - 413 102.
Present adress
The Branch Manager,
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Hanamashetti Building,
Gurukul Road, Bijapur.
... Respondents
(Sri. S.S. Aspalli, Advocate for R2;
Notice to R1 dispensed with V/O Dtd. 28.03.2014)
This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of M.V. Act against
the judgement and award dated 28.06.2011 passed in
MVC No.1627/2008 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal No.IV, Bijapur, partly allowing the
claim petition and seeking enhancement of
compensation.
4
MFA NO.31886 OF 2011
BETWEEN:
Namdev
S/o Tukaram Rupanur,
Age: 53 years,
Occ: Hamal & Agriculture,
(now nil), R/o Tikota,
Tal. & Dist. Bijapur.
... Appellant
(By Sri. Babu H. Metagudda, Advocate)
AND:
1. Pramodkumar
S/o Chotubai Desai,
Age: 48 years, Occ: Business
Owner of Goods Truck bearing
Reg. No.MH-12/AQ-999,
R/o Desai Estate, Jalochi,
Near Market, Tq. Baramati,
Dist. Pune, Maharashtra State.
2. The Branch/Divisional Manager,
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Wing No.3, Nagar Parishad Udyog Bhavan,
Bhiswan Chowk, Baramati - 413 102.
Present adress
The Branch Manager,
New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Hanamashetti Building,
Gurukul Road, Bijapur.
... Respondents
(Sri. S.S. Aspalli, Advocate for R2;
Notice to R1 dispensed with V/O Dtd. 28.03.2014)
5
This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of M.V. Act against
the judgement and award dated 28.06.2011 passed in
MVC No.1628/2008 on the file of the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal No.IV, Bijapur, partly allowing the
claim petition and seeking enhancement of
compensation.
These appeals coming for admission this day, the
Court delivered the following:
JUDGEMENT
Though these matters are listed today for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, they are taken up for final disposal.
2. The appellants in all these appeals dissatisfied with amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal have preferred these appeals, seeking enhancement.
3. The facts reveal that on 10.10.2007 Shankar (the deceased), Namdev (the claimant in MVC No.1628/2008) and Ketri @ Sunil (the claimant in MVC No.1629/2008) were travelling in the Eicher mini- truck bearing No.MH-10/Z-705 and when they came near the petrol bunk on Siradon-Boregaon Road, a truck 6 bearing No.MH-12/AQ-999 drivin in a rash and negligent manner came and hit the mini-truck. Thereby, in the said accident Shankar sustained severe injuries and died on the spot. The claimants in other two claim petitions sustained grievous injuries and were treated in the hospital; they suffered disability.
4. The legal representatives of deceased Shankar i.e., his wife and mother made a claim for compensation in MVC No.1627/2008 for loss of dependency and other conventional heads. The injured claimed compensation in MVC Nos.1628/2008 and 1629/2008 for pain, suffering, mental agony, medical expenses, loss of income etc.
5. All these cases were clubbed by the Tribunal and common evidence was permitted. On behalf of the claimants in all the cases, PW.s.1 to 4 were examined. In their evidence, Exs.P1 to P13 were marked. Whereas, on behalf of the respondents, the 7 Insurance Policy was admitted in evidence as Ex.R1 with consent.
6. The Tribunal, after hearing the learned counsel on both sides and on appreciation of the evidence on record has granted a sum of Rs.4,57,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. as compensation to the claimants in MVC No.1627/2008, a sum of Rs.2,22,600/- with interest @ 6% p.a. to the claimant in MVC No.1628/2008 and a sum of Rs.1,12,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. to the claimant in MVC No.1629/2008. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, the present appeals have been filed.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.
8. The point that arise for my consideration is, Whether the appellants in each of the appeals are entitled to enhanced compensation? If so to what extent?
8
9. Learned counsel for the appellants in all these appeals submits that the compensation awarded in death case is on the lower side for the reason that the income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal is less and it needs enhancement. So also he submits that the compensation awarded on conventional heads is also meager. In the cases of injuries he submits that reasonable compensation is not assessed on each of the heads and further the income assessed by the Tribunal is also on the lower side. On the other hand, Sri. S.S. Aspalli, learned counsel for respondent No.2 - insurer in all the appeals submits that the Tribunal on the basis of the material placed record has awarded just compensation and no grounds are made out to interfere with the impugned judgment and awards.
10. IN MFA No.31951/2011 (MVC No.1629/2008) - The appellant (injured claimant) was a driver. He has produced the driving licence. The accident is of the year 2007. The Tribunal has assessed his income at 9 Rs.3,000/- per month. Taking into consideration that he was employed in a skilled work like a driver, it would be just and proper to assess his income at Rs.4,750/- per month, taking into consideration the wages which are considered in the Lok Adalats. The Tribunal has assessed the permanent disability of the claimant at 10% of the whole body. As the disability in the particular limb was 30%, no reasons are made out to enhance this disability. Thereby, the net compensation payable towards loss of future income would be Rs.96,900/- (4750/-x12x17x10/100). Deducting a sum of Rs.61,200/- awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.35,700/- towards loss of future income.
11. The Tribunal has granted only a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards pain, suffering and mental agony. As the appellant has suffered the fracture of shaft of femur and other injures, it is just and proper to grant a further sum of Rs.15,000/- on this head. 10
12. Only a sum of Rs.5,000/- is granted towards loss of income during the laid up period. Considering the fact that the injuries suffered by the appellant require about three months to resume the normal duties and considering his income at Rs.4,275/- per month (after deducting 10% towards the disability from Rs.4750) for three months, the net compensation payable towards loss of income during the laid up period would be Rs.12,825/. Deducting a sum of Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.7,825/- on this head.
13. A sum of Rs.2,500/- is granted towards attendant charges. As the appellant has taken treatment at Miraj, I think, it would be just and proper to grant an additional sum of Rs.5,000/- on this head.
14. No compensation has been granted towards loss of amenities. As the appellant has suffered permanent disability at 10%, it would be just and proper to 11 award a sum of Rs.10,000/- on this head. Thereby, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.73,525/- with interest @ 6% p.a.
15. IN MFA No.31886/2011 (MVC No.1628/2008) - The appellant was working as a labourer on the vehicle. The Tribunal has assessed his income at Rs.3,000/- per month. It would be just and proper to consider his income at Rs.4,200/- per month, as in respect of the accidents of the year 2007, generally a sum of Rs.4,200/- is considered as income of a labourer in the Lok Adalats. The appellant has suffered the fracture of femur and right tibia. The Tribunal has assessed his disability at 20%, though the permanent disability of the particular limb was in between 40-45%. Taking into consideration the disability at 1/3rd of the particular limb as the permanent disability to the whole body, it would be just and proper to assess his permanent disability at 15%. Thereby, if his income is considered at Rs.4,200/- per month with the disability at 15%, the 12 compensation payable towards loss of future earning would be Rs.1,28,520/- (Rs.4200x12x17x15/10). The amount of Rs.1,29,600/- awarded by the Tribunal is approximately bit more than this amount. Thereby, I do not think it would be proper to interfere with the compensation awarded towards the loss of future earning.
16. So far as the pain and suffering is concerned, the Tribunal has granted only a sum of Rs.10,000/-. As the appellant has suffered two fractures and was an inpatient for 12 days in the hospital, it is proper to grant an additional sum of Rs.15,000/- on this head.
17. The Tribunal has granted only a sum of Rs.3,000/- towards the loss of earning during the laid up period. At the rate of Rs.4,200/- per month and the approximate period of four months to resume to normal duties, deducting 15% towards disability, the net loss of income during the laid up period would be Rs.14,280/-. Deducting a sum of Rs.3,000/- 13 awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.11,280/- on this head.
18. The Tribunal has not granted any compensation towards loss of amenities and hence, the appellant is entitled to Rs.15,000/- on this heads.
19. No compensation has been granted towards conveyance, attendant charges, food and nourishment. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to Rs.5,000/- on all these heads. Thereby, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.46,280/- with interest @ 6% p.a.
20. IN MFA No.31857/2011 (MVC No.1627/2008) - Shankar (the deceased) was the cleaner. Claimant No.1 is his wife and claimant No.2 is his mother. The Tribunal has assessed his income at Rs.2,000/- per month. I think, it would be just and proper to consider his income at Rs.4,500/- per month, as in respect of the accidents of the year 2007, generally a sum of Rs.4,200/- is considered as income of even a 14 labourer in the Lok Adalats and the deductions towards personal expenses of the deceased would be 1/3rd. Therefore, the net compensation payable towards loss of dependency would be Rs.6,48,000/- (3,000/-x12x18). Deducting a sum of Rs.4,32,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is entitled to Rs.2,16,000/- on this head.
21. Only a sum of Rs.25,000/- has been granted on all conventional heads. The appellants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs.25,000/- on these heads. Thus, the appellants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs.2,41,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. Hence, the point is answered in affirmative. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed in part.
The appellant in MFA No.31591/2011 is entitled to Rs,73,525/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till its payment addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 15
The appellant in MFA No.31886/2011 is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.46,280/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till its payment in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
The appellants in MFA No.31857/2011 are entitled to Rs.2,41,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till its payment in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation shall be shared equally by the appellants. Out of the share of appellant No.1 - the wife of the deceased Shankar, a sum of Rs.50,000/- shall be deposited in her name in any Nationalized Bank for a period of five years. The excess amount of her share shall be paid to her.
Sd/-
JUDGE LG