Karnataka High Court
Pooja W/O. Sudam Badge vs Sri. Wahedmiyan Qurashi S/O. ... on 21 February, 2018
Author: L Narayana Swamy
Bench: L.Narayana Swamy
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY- 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 202017/2014 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. Pooja W/o Sudam Badge,
Age: 29 years, occ: Household,
R/o Village Matala,
Tq. basavakalyan, Dist. Bidar.
2. Punit S/o Sudam Badge,
Age: 5 years, Minor,
3. Aniket S/o Sudam badge,
Age: 8 months, Minor
Both U/g of their real mother
Appellant No.1.
4. Suryabhan S/o Vishwanath badge,
Age: 57 years, occ: Tailoring,
5. Trivana W/o Suryabhan Badge,
Age: 47 years, Occ: Household,
All R/o Village Matala,
Tq. Basavakalyan, Dist. Bidar.
... Appellants
(By Sri. Khadme Umesh, Advocate)
2
AND:
1. Sri. Wahedmiyan Quraishi,
S/o Sharifuddin Quraishi,
Age: Major, Occ: Lorry Business,
R/o H.No.8/65, New Quraishi Colony,
Basavakalyan, Dist. Bidar-585401.
2. The Divisional Manager,
Royal Sundram Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
Sundram Towers, 45 & 46 wide Road,
Channai-600014.
... Respondents
(By Sri. Sudarshan M, Advocate for R2;
Notice to R1 D/w V/o dated 12.02.2015)
This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section
173(1) of M.V.Act, praying to allow the appeal by modifying
the judgment and award dated 29.05.2013 passed by the
Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT, Basavakalyan in MVC
No.43/2012 and consequently be pleased to enhance the
compensation from Rs.9,24,000/- to Rs.16,32,000/- with
interest @ 12% per annum from the date of petition till
actual realization, in the interest of justice and equity.
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the Court
delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
IA.No.1/2015 is allowed. The learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to amend Royal Sudaram Life 3 Insurance Co. Limited as respondent No.2. Counsel to amend the cause-title.
2. Sri. Sudarshan M, learned counsel is directed to take notice for respondent No.2.
3. Appeal by the claimants who are minor children and parents of the deceased, who succumbed to the road accident in the year 2011 and the prayer is for enhancement of compensation.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent- insurance submits to dismiss the appeal.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. The prayer of the learned counsel for the claimants is that the Tribunal has not assessed the income on the basis of the evidence and materials on record and what is assessed is on the lower side.
Since the accident is not in dispute what is left to this Court is to consider the case of the appellants for 4 awarding compensation by taking notional income. The claimants claim that the deceased was a driver and to support the same Ex.P9-driving licence has been produced. In the claim petition it is stated that the deceased was earning about Rs.8,000/- per month. Tribunal has disbelieved the same and assessed the income at Rs.6,000/- per month which is contrary to the fact and law. Even if the claimants failed to prove the income, the Courts should take notional income on the basis of the various factors like size of the family, place of residence, year of accident etc., cost of living, price index and the fall in the interest rate of Bank. In the instant case, there are five dependents and including the deceased the size of the family was six in number. It is normal presumption that unless a person earn some good amount, he would not be in a position to feed the family. It is also observed that out of five claimants two are minor. Under these circumstances, the notional income has to be assessed at Rs.8,000/- 5 per month since the deceased was driver by profession plus Rs.100/- batta per day which comes to Rs.11,000/- per month. The same is to be taken as notional income. It is general accepted preposition that in addition to payment of salary, the driver who get batta.
7. By taking the notional income of Rs.11,000/- per month, the calculation for the purpose of awarding compensation under the loss of dependency would be Rs.11000 X 12 X ¼ X 16 = Rs.15,84,000/-, and the same is awarded. All put together, Rs.70,000/- is awarded under the conventional heads. To that extent the order of the Tribunal stands modified. Enhanced amount carries interest at the rate as is awarded by the Tribunal. Apportionment shall be as per the award. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part.
6
Since there are two minor children, who are aged 5 years, and 8 months, considering their future and to provide education the sole-parent, that too the mother would find it difficult to give good education to the children. If the children are not provided proper education they be forced to take to child-labour or some other odd jobs which may not be conducive for their future. Further, in compliance of Articles 21 and 21A of Constitution of India, it is the duty of the Court to see that the school going children should continue their education. The absence of the father, who is an earning member, should not be a hurdle to such children or else, they may drop out from the school. The second appellant is a minor daughter, who is five years of age and she must be going to school now; and the second child the third appellant herein is a baby of eight months. The object of Article 21A of Constitution of India is to provide compulsory education till the child attains 14 years of age. The laudable object is that 7 children shall not discontinue their education because of the death of father and it is believed that, normally, the mother may not be in a position to earn like a father. Under these circumstances, it is appropriate to direct the insurance to deposit Rs.2,00,000/- each as a corpus fund in its name in any of the nationalised bank of the choice of the mother, till the children attain 20 years of age. The mother of the children shall furnish fee structure to the Bank where the corpus fund is deposited, and the Bank may credit the fee amount to the school/college directly through RTGS. Upon the children attaining twenty years, as the case may be, the corpus fund along with the unutilised interest portion shall be refunded to the Insurance without any orders from the Court. It is made clear that in case if the child/children discontinues or drops-out from the school, then also corpus fund with the unutilised interest amount shall be refunded to the Insurance. 8 Deposit to be made within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE SMP