Karnataka High Court
Sridevi vs Raju Badiya Poojary on 4 July, 2013
Author: B.Sreenivase Gowda
Bench: B.Sreenivase Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA
Miscellaneous First Appeal No.8123 of 2010 (MV)
BETWEEN
1. SRIDEVI,
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
W/O. LATE SUBRAYA PARAMESHWARA BHATTA
2. VIJAYA,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
3. GANESHA,
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS,
4. LAXMI,
AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS,
APPELLANT NO.2 TO 4 ARE THE CHILDREN OF
LATE SUBRAYA PARAMESHWARA BHATTA,
APPELLANT NO.4 ARE MINORS
REP: BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN
AND MOTHER SRIDEVI,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT DALI,
KOLLUR VILLAGE & POST,
KUNDAPURA TALUK.
... APPELLANTS
(By Sri. H. PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY, ADV.)
2
AND
1. RAJU BADIYA POOJARY
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
S/O. BADIYA POOJARY,
R/O. HEGADEHAKLU, KOLLUR VILLAGE,
KUNDAPURA VILLAGE.
2. T. VENKATAKRISHNA
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
S/O. MADEVA BHATTA,
R/O. KOLLUR VILLAGE AND POST,
KUNDAPURA TALUK.
3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE: POST BOX NO.18,
KANCHAN TOWERS, N.H.17,
KUNDAPURA,
REP: BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri. O. MAHESH, ADV. FOR R.3,
R.1 AND R.2 ARE SERVED)
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2009 PASSED IN MVC
NO.876/2006 ON THE FILE OF PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST
TRACK COURT, KUNDAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
This appeal coming on for Orders, this day, the
Court, delivered the following:
3
JUDGMENT
This appeal is by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
2. Though the matter is listed in the orders list, with the consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
3. For the sake of convenience 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 deceased Subraya Bhat in a motor traffic accident occurred on 10.02.2006 due to rash and negligent driving of Bolero vehicle bearing registration No. KA-20-M-8367 by its driver and liability of the insurer of the said vehicle to pay compensation, the only point arises for consideration is:
Whether compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper or does it call for enhancement ?4
5. Learned Counsel for the claimants submits that deceased was aged about 48 years at the time of his death in the accident. He was working as an Assistant Archaka at Kollur Mookambika Temple and was earning Rs.5,000/-
p.m. and therefore 30% is to be added to his income towards future prospects as per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rajesh and Others vs Rajbir Singh and Others reported in 2013 ACJ 1403 and he prays for allowing the appeal by enhancing compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
6. Whereas learned Counsel for the insurer submits that deceased was not working as an Assistant Archaka on permanent basis and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and he prays for dismissal of the appeal.
7. Deceased was aged about 48 years as evident from post mortem report Ex P 5. The multiplier applicable to his age group is 13. The claimants who are his wife and 5 children in support of their contention that deceased was earning Rs.5,000/- by working as an Assistant to Pradhan Archaka of Mookambika Temple except examining the 1st claimant wife of the deceased as PW 1 have not produced any documents in that regard. In the absence of proof of income, considering the age of the deceased as 48 years, year of accident as 2006 his income is assessed at Rs.3,500/- p.m. to which 30% is to be added towards future prospects so his monthly income comes to Rs.4,550/- p.m. The dependent claimants are four in number, therefore 1/4th has to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased and 3/4th has to be taken as his contribution to family. Accordingly, loss of dependency works out to Rs.5,32,350/ (Rs.4,550/- x ¾ x 12 x 13) and it is awarded as against Rs.3,51,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to Rs.50,000/- is to be added towards various conventional heads such as loss of consortium, loss of estate, loss of love and affection and transportation of dead body and funeral expense. 6
8. Thus, the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.5,82,350/- as against Rs.3,91,5000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realization.
9. Accordingly the appeal is allowed in part and the Judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated herein above. The claimants are entitled for additional compensation of Rs.1,90,850/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realization but excluding interest for the delayed period of 169 days in filing the appeal.
10. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the additional compensation amount with interest, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, excluding interest for the delayed period of 169 days in filing the appeal, from which Rs.40,000/- each with proportionate interest is ordered to be deposited in FD in 7 the name of the claimants in any nationalized/scheduled Bank or post office for a period of six years, with a right of option to withdraw interest periodically and the remaining amount is ordered to be released in favour of the first claimant. The Tribunal while releasing remaining compensation is also directed to issue F.D.slip to the claimants to enable them to withdraw the amount on its maturity without approaching the Tribunal once again. The concerned bank also is directed to release the F.D. amount on its maturity without insisting any order from the Tribunal.
No order as to costs.
SD/-
JUDGE Vb/-
CT: bs*