Karnataka High Court
Smt Nagamma vs Sri Kumar C on 2 March, 2020
Bench: Alok Aradhe, M.Nagaprasanna
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2020
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA
M.F.A. NO.7819/2016 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. NAGAMMA
W/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS.
2. CHANDRAPPA
S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS.
3. SUBRAMANI
S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS.
4. HARISH
S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS.
5. SMT GANGAMMA @ MUNIYAMMA
W/O MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS.
ALL ARE R/AT KAGGANAHALLI (V)
THIPPADODDI POST
MAJARA GADDUR PANCHAYAT
MULBAGALA (TALUK), KOLAR DISTRICT.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. GURUPRASAD K.T. ADV.,)
2
AND:
1. SRI KUMAR C
CHANDRAPPA
NO.3, AISAMIPALYA
KOTHGHATTAPALYA
NELAMANGALA-560201
BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT.
2. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
CENTENARY BUILDING
5TH FLOOR, M G ROAD, BANGALORE-560001
BY ITS MANAGER.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.C. BETSUR, ADV., FOR R2
V/O DTD 13/11/2019 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)
---
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 1.8.2016 PASSED
IN MVC NO.40/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 5TH ADDITIONAL SMALL
CAUSE JUDGE & 24TH ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for short) has been filed by the claimants being aggrieved by the judgment dated 01.08.2016 passed by 3 the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 02.12.2015 at about 9.15 p.m., when deceased was crossing Old Madras road and when he came in front of Vijaya Bank, at that time, the driver of Tata Ace bearing registration No.KA-52/8579 which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner in a high speed, dashed the deceased. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Thereafter, he was shifted to the hospital. Eventually, he succumbed to the injuries. Thereafter, the claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act on the ground that the deceased was aged about 47 years at the time of accident and was employed as a mason and used to earn `900/- per day. It was further pleaded that the accident took place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the Tata Ace 4 by its driver. The claimants claimed compensation to the tune of `50,00,000/- along with interest. On service of notice, the respondent No.1 did not appear and was proceeded exparte. Respondent No.2 appeared before the Tribunal and filed written statement in which inter alia, the factum of the accident was denied. However, it was admitted that the offending vehicle was insured with the respondent No.2 and its liability was restricted to the terms and conditions of the policy. It was also pleaded that the accident took place due to the negligence on the part of the deceased as there was no zebra crossing. It was further pleaded that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have any valid and effective driving licence and the vehicle was being plied in violation of the terms and conditions of the policy.
3. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimants, in order to prove 5 their case, examined one witness namely PW-1 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P14. The respondent No.2 did not adduce any evidence but with the consent of the parties, policy was marked as Ex.R1. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the Tata Ace by its driver, as a result of which, the deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled to a compensation of `7,72,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants fairly submitted that the deceased, at the time of accident, was aged about 47 years. However, no evidence was adduced with regard to his income. Therefore, the notional income of the appellant ought to have been taken at `9,000/- p.m. as the accident had taken place 6 in the year 2015. It was further pleaded that 30% ought to have been added on account of future prospects and 1/4th ought to have been deducted towards personal expenses. It is further submitted that the amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal is on the lower side. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has supported the award passed by the Claims Tribunal.
5. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. Admittedly, at the time of accident, the deceased was aged 47 years and was employed as a mason. The claimants have not adduced any evidence with regard to the income of the deceased. Therefore, the notional income has to be fixed as per the guidelines issued by the High Court Legal Services Committee. Since the accident has taken place in the year 2015, the notional income has to be taken at `9,000/- p.m. To the 7 aforesaid amount, 30% has to be added on account of future prospects. Thus, the monthly income comes to `11,700/-. Out of which, we deem it appropriate to deduct 1/4th towards personal expenses and therefore, the monthly dependency comes to `8,775/-. Taking into account the age of the deceased which was 47 years at the time of accident, multiplier of 13 has to be adopted. The claimants are entitled to `13,68,900/- on account of loss of dependency. The claimants are widow, children and mother of the deceased. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. NANU RAM' 2018 ACJ 2782, the claimants are entitled to `40,000/- each on account of loss of consortium and loss of love and affection. Thus, the total amount of compensation under this head is assessed at `2,00,000/-. In addition, the claimants are entitled to `30,000/- on account of loss of estate and funeral expenses. Thus, the claimants are entitled to total compensation of `15,98,900/- 8 Needless to state that the aforesaid amount of compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till payment is made. To the aforesaid extent, the judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE RV