Karnataka High Court
Mrs Biji Kumar Konghot vs Mr Joseph P C on 17 August, 2011
Bench: K.L.Manjunath, H.S.Kempanna
sev IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGA LORE, DATED THIS THE 17" DAY OF AUGUST. vol a PRESENT . THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KL MANSU NATH AND | THE HON'BLE MR.J USTICE H.S-REMPANNA | ML ANO.O72 2007 MY) BETWEEN lL. MES BIJ KUM: AR KONGHOT W/O LATE K.ELIMAR KO! wGHOT NO.52. [PF LOOR, MELE Y As Be NE COLONY BANASWADI © : . DANGAL ORE- i 80042. 7 Nw MAS JOEL. SA Ma yer 2 oe S/O LATE K KUMAR KONGHOT AGED A BOUT 4 YEARS: BS. ABY. JEMIM: aH mo D) POLATE K KUMAR KONGHOT ACED ABOUT 3 MONTHS, ': BOTH REPRESENTED BY THEIR NA PURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER i. MRS. Bl! KUMAR KONGHOT W/O-LATE K KUMAR KONGHOT NO. 52. IL FLOOR, VIJAYA BANK COLONY _. BANASWADI. ~ TANGALORE -- 560 042 . APPELLANTS . (BY SRLP.B.RAJU ~ ADV. FOR M/S SREEVATSA ASSOCIATES) "AND Mi JOSE PH PC | NEI fO.1O, OLD NOLTG. TOTLAND CAVE : aE STE REET, NUNGAMBARKAM URES RS bad CHENNAT 600034 be ICIC]L LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD oO HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT ZENITH HOUSE KESHAVRAO KHADYE MARG aon MAHALAKSHMI Bg ES MUMBAI 400 031 rs _ RESPONDENTS a
(BY SRI. AM VENKATESH -ADV. FOR RQ ee NOTICE TO R-1 DISPENSED witht V{/O DATE (D: 1045 2 "oy THIS MPA TS PILED U/S- L730) OF. MV" ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD. DATED:2 1/08/ 2006 PASSED IN MVC NO.G639/2004 ON Ti qE PILE OF ; THE VITE ADDL. JUDGE, MEMBER: MACT?\, COU RL OF SMALL CAUSES, METROPOLITAN UAREA, 7 BAME SALORE . (se "CH-5). PARTLY ALLOWING THis C be TE PETFEION FOR COMPE NSATION & SEEKING EN: ANC Eg SMEN r OF c OMPINSATION. THIS APPE: ALL COR MING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY. MANJUR SAUTE, J » DEL AVE CRED THE FOLLOWING:-
"aU DGMENT he claimants have preferred this appeal being not . satished with the judgement and award passed by the MACT.. Bangalore, Mayohall Unit in MVC 6639/2004, dated 218.2006.
oe, 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. The admitted facts are as hereunder :-
Ee aa ee SE abd The first appellant is the widow and appellants .2 and 3 are the minor children of one K.Kumar Konghot, who died in a road traffic accident occurred on 26.6.2004 at 4.15 p.m. on account on rash and, negligent driving of the driver. of the Scorpio car bearing No.TN-O1-X-2 170 which vehicle dashed against scooter of the deceased bearing : NS o,AP-3)- M-726 L The deceased was ager about 34. years, "He was running a Consultancy Service in the name anit style of Adriel Tech. Consultants. He was nelping the Multi National Companies to seoure: human resources on Commission basis. Earlier, he was employed in Samrun Technology.
Indiranagar. According to the claimants, the deceased "was. getting "income of €38,000/- per month. Dishehevinig the evidence of the claimants the Tribunal assessed 'the income at €1,20,000/- per annum, by applying multiplier of 15 and by deducting one-third of Ris income towards personal expenses and income tax, "assessed loss of dependency at *9.79,995. In addition to that a sum of €32,000/- is awarded under the py eye teueybipwess ae cofvertiona) heads.
tg & Pius, @ total compensation of % ee f10,51,995/- has been awarded with interest at 6%-p.a. from the date of the petition till realisation. Being not. satisfied with the same, the present appeal is filed for further enhancement of the compensation, .
4. We have heard the cou nsel for the parties. a
5. According to- the learned © counsel: for the appellants the Tribunal has committed 'serious error in assessing the income at @] 20,000/- per annum based on Ex.P9 which is an income "tax return filed for the assessment year 200 1 02 while the deceased was working : as. ani / employee . "in Samrun Technology. According to 'him, the 'ribunal did not consider exhibit : FI I and other documents to show thal after resigning his job he was doing consultancy services and getting commission. of (8.33 percent on annual gross income ~o<miinus referral fee of all the candidates supplied to different companies by him. He further contends the Tribunal did not consider the TDS certificate issued by "different companies which is prior to the death of the deceased Lo Show that his income | i was more than €50,000/- per month. in. the circumstance, he requests the court to allow the appeal -- and enhance the compensation.
6. Per contra, the learned 'cdéunsel for the Insurance company contends -that the. tribunal is justified in relying upon the incorme assessment of the deceased. Therefore, he requests the. court to dismiss the appeal.
7. Having heard the counsel for the parties, the only point te be considered by us in this appeal is, "Whether the appellanis are entitled for the
-enha neement of comperisation?
"8 Since occurrence of the accident, age and avocation.of fhe deceased are not in dispute, we are oo required to consider only income of the deceased and ~ eonimersation to be awarded to claimants. 9, It is no doubt true that the Tribunal by relying upon the income tax returns for the year 2001-02 has assessed the income of the deceased. But the Tribunal 6 has failed to consider that the deceased ahs left the job and has started his own independent comsullaricy -- agency in the year 2002 and he had a flourishing © business which is evident froni the tax" deduction, certificate issued by different. companies few : . mont' prior to the death of the deceased, The tax deduction at source by different companies cantiot "be doubted by this Court. Therefore, we have. to consider what would have been the' indme of ihe deceased based on these tax deductions coitific ates and consideri ng the ups and downs in the b usiness, this court has to guess what should have been the proper income ol the deceased as on the, date of Acci den t Admittedly, the deceased prior
- to the opening of his own business was working in a Company : drawing a sum of £1,20,000/- p.a. and considering the TDS certificate we are of the opinion the income of such hi ghiy qualified person could not be less ve lan 220,000 f- and £2.40.000/- p.a. out of which a ~. sum of €60,00C/- has to be decucted towards income tax amd other expenditure. The net income of the deceased has to be assessed at £1.80,000/- p.a. Out of _ Ss SE SSS GS ee which we have to deduct one-third towards his personal expenditure. If that is so, the loss of dependeney has to -- be assessed at €1,20,000/- p.a. and considering the age © of the deceased, we have to apply the nvultipler of 16, Therefore, the loss of dependency has to be assessed at 219,20,000/-. In addition to 'that the claimanits are entitled for a sum of £40:006/- ' nder th e conventional heads. Thus, in all the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of €19.60,000/-..Since the Tribunal has awarded compensation of T10,51,695/-, the appellants are entitled for. an. enhanced compensation of £9.08,005/ ~ and the same is rounded of to 79,08,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the petition ull realisation. Out of the enhanced compensation a sum ey of #2,50,000/- each shall be deposited in the name of appellants 2 and 3, the minor children till each of them attains the age of 21 years and their mother is entitled to withdraw the periodical interest. Out of the "remaining amount, a sum of €2,75,000/- with interest accrued thereon shall be deposited in the name of first appellant, the wicow of the deceased, for a period of 5 oat %y, BE OSS STRESSING SSNS US years. She is entitied to withdraw the periodical interest. Rest of the amount be released to the first appellant the | widow of the deceased.
WIM ie owe baad sk BB rs LOSES SESS IO GS SSS