Karnataka High Court
B T Saritha vs Smt Bhagirathi Madhava Naik on 16 August, 2022
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1- M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011,
7844 /2011, 7845/2011
& 2972/ 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 7842/2011 (MV)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.7841/2011 (MV)
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.7844/2011 (MV)
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.7845/2011 (MV)
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.2972/2012 (MV-D)
M.F.A. No. 7842/2011
BETWEEN:
B T SARITHA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
W/O LATE B.B.THIMMAYYA,
R/O MESCOM QUARTERS,
VADER HOBLI VILLAGE
KUNDAPURA TALUK.
...APPELLANT
Digitally
signed by (BY SRI MAHESHKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
PANKAJA S
Location: AND:
High Court
of Karnataka 1. SMT. BHAGIRATHI MADHAVA NAIK
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
W/O LATE MAHADEVA NAIK,
R/O KANNIMANE, JALLI VILLAGE
AND POST, BHATKALA TALUK,
U.K DISTRICT.
2. MISS KAMALA
AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS,
-2- M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011,
7844 /2011, 7845/2011
& 2972/ 2012
D/O LATE MAHADEVA NAIK,
R/O KANNIMANE,
JALLI VILLAGE AND POST,
BHATKALA TALUK,
U.K DISTRICT.
3. MISS VIMALA
AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS,
D/O LATE MAHADEVA NAIK,
R/O KANNIMANE,
JALLI VILLAGE AND POST,
BHATKALA TALUK,
U.K DISTRICT.
4. MISS PALLAVI
AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS,
D/O LATE MAHADEVA NAIK,
R/O KANNIMANE,
JALLI VILLAGE AND POST,
BHATKALA TALUK,
U.K DISTRICT.
5. SMT. NAGAMMA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
W/O HONNAPPA NAIK
R/O KANNIMANE,
JALLI VILLAGE AND POST,
BHATKALA TALUK,
U.K DISTRICT.
6. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE: PRABHU BUILDING,
MUNICIPAL ROAD, KUNDAPURA,
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
7. MR. R SELVARAJ
S/O RAMASWAMY
R/O No.17, II CROSS,
NEW PETANOOLPET,
BANGALORE - 560 002.
8. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SHANKAR BUILDING,
-3- M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011,
7844 /2011, 7845/2011
& 2972/ 2012
MOSQUE ROAD,
UDUPI,
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. NAGARAJA HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R5,
SRI H C VRUSHABENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R6
SRI R JAIPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R8
SERVICE TO R7 HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DTD. 18.11.21)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.04.2010 PASSED IN
MVC No. 474/2005 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &
ADDITIONAL MACT, KUNDAPURA, AWARDING A
COMPENSATION OF Rs.6,23,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL PAYMENT.
M.F.A. No. 7841/2011
BETWEEN:
SMT.B T SARITHA THIMMAYYA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
W/O LATE B.B.THIMMAYYA,
R/O MESCOM QUARTERS,
VADERHOBLI VILLAGE
KUNDAPURA TALUK.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MAHESHKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . SMT. GOWRI
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
W/O PADDA MOGAVEERA,
R/O NEAR BOBBARAYANAKATTE,
OPP:MESCOM OFFICE,
VADERAHOBLI VILLAGE,
KUNDAPURA TALUK - 576 101.
-4- M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011,
7844 /2011, 7845/2011
& 2972/ 2012
2 . MISS SHYAMALA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
D/O PADA MOGAVEERA,
R/O NEAR BOBBARAYANAKATTE,
OPP: MESCOM OFFICE,
VADERAHOBLI VILLAGE,
KUNDAPURA TALUK -576 101.
3 . THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE: PRABHU BUILDING,
MUNICIPAL ROAD,
KUNDAPURA - 576 101
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
4 . SRI BALASUBRAMANYA
S/O SRINIVASA
R/O 52(A) VALIPURANAGAR,
KAROOR-639 002.
5 . MR R SELVARAJ
S/O RAMASWAMY,
R/O NO.17, II CROSS,
NEW PETANOOLPET,
BANGALORE - 560 002.
6 . NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SHANKAR BUILDING,
MOSQUE ROAD, UDUPI -576 101
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H C VRUSHABHENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R3
SRI R JAIPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R6
APPEAL AGAINST R1 ABATED V/O DTD. 29.6.2017
R2 - SERVED, NOTICE TO R4 DISPENSED WITH
V/O DTD. 16.7.2021, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R5
HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DTD 18.11.2021)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.04.2010 PASSED IN
MVC No. 330/2005 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &
ADDITIONAL MACT, KUNDAPURA, AWARDING A
-5- M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011,
7844 /2011, 7845/2011
& 2972/ 2012
COMPENSATION OF Rs.7,88,500/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL PAYMENT.
M.F.A. No. 7844/2011
BETWEEN:
1. B T SARITHA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
W/O LATE B.B. THIMMAYYA,
R/O HOUSING BOARD QUARTERS
SAMYATHADKA
NEAR SHRUTHI COMPOUND
PUTTUR TALUK.
2. MANJUSHA
AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS
D/O LATE B B THIMMAYYA,
R/O HOUSING BOARD QUARTERS,
SAMYATHADKA,
NEAR SHRUTHI COMPOUND,
PUTTUR TALUK.
THE APPELLANT BEING MINOR IS
REPRESEBTED BY HER
NEXT FRIEND GUARDIAN
AND MOTHER, B T SARITHA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
W/O LATE B B THIMMAYYA
R/O HOUSING BOARD QUARTERS
SAMYATHADKA
NEAR SHRUTHI COMPOUND
PUTTUR TALUK. ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI MAHESHKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. R SELVARAJ (MAJOR)
S/O RAMASWAMY
R/O No.17, II CROSS,
NEW PETANOOLPET,
-6- M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011,
7844 /2011, 7845/2011
& 2972/ 2012
KALASIPALYAM
BANGALORE.
2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE : KUNDAPURA
PRABHU BUILDING, MUNICIPAL ROAD,
KUNDAPURA, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SHANKER BUILDING, MOSQUE ROAD,
UDUPI, REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H C VRUSHABENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2
SRI R JAIPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R3
SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R1 HELD SUFFICIENT
V/O DTD. 18.11.2021)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.04.2010 PASSED IN
MVC No.812/2005 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &
ADDITIONAL MACT, KUNDAPURA DISMISSING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
IN M.F.A. No. 7845/2011
BETWEEN:
1. B T SARITHA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
W/O LATE B.B. THIMMAYYA,
R/O HOUSING BOARD QUARTERS
SAMYATHADKA
NEAR SHRUTHI COMPOUND
PUTTUR TALUK.
2. MANJUSHA
AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS
D/O LATE B B THIMMAYYA,
R/O HOUSING BOARD QUARTERS,
SAMYATHADKA,
-7- M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011,
7844 /2011, 7845/2011
& 2972/ 2012
NEAR SHRUTHI COMPOUND,
PUTTUR TALUK. ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI MAHESHKIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . R SELVARAJ (MAJOR)
S/O RAMASWAMY
R/O No.17, II CROSS,
NEW PETANOOLPET,
KALASIPALYAM
BANGALORE.
2 . THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE : KUNDAPURA
PRABHU BUILDING, MUNICIPAL ROAD,
KUNDAPURA.
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
3 . THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SHANKER BUILDING, MOSQUE ROAD,
UDUPI.
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H C VRUSHABENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2
SRI R JAIPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R3
SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R1 HELD SUFFICIENT
V/O DTD. 18.11.2021)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.04.2010 PASSED IN
MVC No.816/2005 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE &
ADDITIONAL MACT, KUNDAPURA PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
-8- M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011,
7844 /2011, 7845/2011
& 2972/ 2012
M.F.A. No. 2972/2012
BETWEEN:
1 . SMT. BHAGIRATHI MADHAVA NAIK
W/O LATE MAHADEVA NAIK
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS.
2 . MINOR KAMALA
D/O LATE MAHADEVA NAIK
AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS.
3 . MINOR VIMALA
D/O LATE MAHADEVA NAIK
AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS.
4 . MINOR PALLAVI
D/O LATE MAHADEVA NAIK
AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS
(PETITIONER Nos.2 TO 4 ARE
REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER
AND NATURAL GUARDIAN
PETITIONER No.1)
5 . NAGAMMA
W/O HONNAPPA NAIKA
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT KANNIMANE,
JALLI VILLAGE & POST,
BHATKALA TALUK,
U.K DISTRICT.
..APPELLANTS
(BY SRI K PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1 . SMT. SARITHA THIMMAYYA
W/O THIMMAYYA
MAJOR IN AGE
R/O MESCOM QUARTERS,
-9- M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011,
7844 /2011, 7845/2011
& 2972/ 2012
VADERHOBLI VILLAGE,
KUNDAPURA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT.
2 . THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE: PRABHU BUILDING,
MUNICIPAL ROAD,
KUNDAPURA,
UDUPI DISTRICT.
3 . R SELVARAJ
S/O RAMASWAMY
MAJOR IN AGE
R/O No.17, II CROSS,
NEW PETANOOLPET,
KALASIPALYAM,
BANGALORE.
4 . THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
REP. BY ITS DIVISIOANL MANAGER
SHANKAR BUILDING,
MOSQUE ROAD, UDUPI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI H C VRUSHABHENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R2
SRI R JAIPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R4
SRI MAHESH KIRAN SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1
NOTICE TO R3 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.04.2010 PASSED IN
MVC No.474/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,
ADDITIONAL MACT, KUNDAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING;
- 10 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011,
7844 /2011, 7845/2011
& 2972/ 2012
JUDGMENT
On 27.01.2005 an accident occurred between a Maruti Omni Car and a petrol tanker. The Maruti Omni Car was being driven by * Sri. Thimmayya and was carrying three other inmates. As a result of this collision, not only Sri. Thimmayya but all the three inmates were also killed. Incidentally, the son of Sri. Thimmayya, a 13 year old boy was also killed in the accident.
2. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that an accident did take place but the accident occurred solely due to the negligence of Sri. Thimmayya and as a consequence his wife would not be entitled to claim compensation for the death of Sri. Thimmayya and Sachin
- her son.
3. The Tribunal has also held that Smt. Saritha, wife of Sri. Thimmayya who had succeeded to the estate of Sri. Thimmayya would also be liable to pay compensation for the death of other two inmates, Nagesh Naik and *Deleted vide chamber order dated 30.09.2022 - 11 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011 C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012 Mahadeva Naik on the ground that Sri. Thimmayya did not possess the requisite endorsement to drive the transport vehicle.
4. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.7,88,500/- to the legal heirs of Sri. Nagesh Naik who was killed in the accident. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.6,23,000/- to the legal representatives of Sri. Mahadeva Naik - another inmate of the Maruti Omni and they have filed appeals seeking for enhancement.
5. As stated above, the claim in respect of death of Sri. Thimmayya and Sachin were dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that Sri. Thimmayya - * was himself responsible for the accident and Smt. Saritha, his wife *who was the owner and *her daughter who had succeeded to his estate could not claim compensation.
6. Smt. Saritha and her daughter are in appeal challenging not only the finding that her husband Sri. Thimmayya was responsible for the accident but also on *Corrected/deleted vide chamber order dated 30.09.2022 - 12 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011 C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012 the ground that the Tribunal had committed a serious error in not awarding any compensation for the death of Sri. Thimmayya and Sachin.
7. Admittedly both the Maruthi Omni Car which was owned by *B.T.SARITHA/ Sri. Thimmayya and petrol tanker were insured. It is also not in dispute that the Maruthi Omni Car was issued with a package policy and as a consequence all the inmates of the car would automatically be covered by virtue of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Balakrishnan and another reported in 2013 (1) SCC 731.
8. The Tribunal has taken the view that Sri. Thimmayya did not possess an endorsement to drive a transport vehicle and therefore the insurer would stand exonerated. In view of the judgment rendered in the case of Mukund Dewangan Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited reported in 2017 (14) SCC 663 this *Inserted vide chamber order dated 30.09.2022 - 13 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011 C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012 finding cannot be sustained and the insurer would be liable to pay the compensation.
9. The other contention advanced by Smt. Saritha is that the finding of the Tribunal that Sri. Thimmayya alone was negligent was incorrect. It is the contention of the learned counsel that the accident occurred at about 01.00 am and the damages incurred by the petrol tanker and the Maruthi Omni Car indicate that there was definitely fault on the part of the driver of the tanker. Even if it is assumed that Sri. Thimmayya had gone onto the wrong side of the road. Learned counsel took pains to elaborate on his submissions and contended that serious allegations were made that the driver of the tanker himself was responsible and owner of the tanker did not choose to contest the proceedings at all and as a consequence the assertions made by the claimant ought to have been accepted in toto. He also highlighted the fact that the driver of the tanker who would have been the best witnesses to speak about the negligence was not examined before the Tribunal and therefore the finding - 14 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011 C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012 that Sri. Thimmayya was alone negligent cannot be sustained.
10. Sri. R. Jaiprakash, learned counsel for the insurer on the other hand contended that the finding recorded by the Tribunal is unexceptionable and the Tribunal on a thorough analysis of the spot mahazar has come to the right conclusion that Sri. Thimmayya was alone responsible for the accident.
11. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties it will have to be determined as to whether Sri. Thimmayya alone was responsible for the accident or whether there was some negligence on the part of the driver of the tanker. No doubt the spot mahazar does indicate that the point of impact between the Maruthi Omni Car and the tanker was on the right side of the road thereby indicating that in all probability the Maruthi Omni Car had strayed on to the wrong side of the road. However, it is to be noticed that the driver of the petrol tanker who would be sitting at a vantage point and - 15 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011 C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012 would have had a clear vision of the road as compared to the driver of the Maruthi Omni Car and he could have easily taken steps to avoid the collision. However, the driver of the tanker was not examined and the owner of the tanker also did not contest the proceedings. In my view, therefore, notwithstanding the fact that a charge sheet had been laid against Sri. Thimmayya, given the facts and circumstances of this particular case and taking into consideration the kind of damage caused both to the tanker as well as to the Maruthi Omni Car, it would be appropriate to attribute the negligence in the ratio of 75 :
25, i.e., 75% against Sri. Thimmayya and 25% against the driver of the tanker. As a consequence, the insurer of the petrol tanker would be liable to pay 25% of the compensation to the claimants and the insurer of the Maruthi Omni Car would be liable to pay 75% of the compensation to the claimants.
12. As far as the claim for enhancement, it is not in dispute that the legal representatives of Sri. Nagesh Naik - 16 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011 C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012 have not sought for enhancement and are satisfied with the sum of Rs.7,88,500/- awarded by the Tribunal.
13. In respect of claim for the death of Sri. Mahadeva Naik, the claimants are in appeal (MFA No. 2972/2012) seeking for enhancement.
14. The Tribunal has determined the notional income of Sri. Mahadeva Naik at Rs.4,000/- which is just and proper and it does not call for interference. To the said sum of Rs.4,000/-, 40% would have to be added as future prospects and this would result in the monthly income of Sri. Mahadeva Naik to be Rs.5,600/-. Out of the said sum, 1/4th would have been deducted towards his personal expenses which would result in his monthly income at Rs.4,200/-. Consequently, the legal representatives of Sri. Mahadeva Naik would be entitled to 4200 X 12 X 16 = Rs.8,06,400/- towards loss of dependency.
15. The claimants being the wife, 3 daughters and mother, each of them would be entitled to Rs.44,000/- - 17 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012 towards consortium and Rs.33,000/- under conventional heads and the claimants would be entitled for the following sums:
Loss of dependency - Rs.8,06,400.00 Consortium - Rs.2,20,000.00 (44000 X 5) Conventional heads - Rs. 33,000.00
------------------
TOTAL - Rs.10,59,400.00 Out of the said compensation, 50% shall be made over to the mother and wife of the deceased Sri. Mahadeva Naik and the remaining 50% shall be invested in Fixed Deposit for a period of 3 years and thereafter made over to the daughters of Sri. Mahadeva Naik.
16. As far as the appeal relating to the death of Sachin son of Sri. Thimmayya (MFA No. 7844/2011), it is borne out from the evidence that he was studying in 8th standard and was therefore aged about 13 years. The Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal and another Vs. - 18 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011 C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012 Lala and others reported in 2014 (1) SCC 244 has determined the notional income at Rs.30,000/- per annum for a non-earning members and has applied the multiplier of 15. Applying the said decision, the mother and sister of Sachin would be entitled to (30000 X 15) a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- towards loss of dependency. They would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.88,000/- (44000 X 2) towards consortium and to a sum of Rs.33,000/- under conventional heads. Accordingly, the mother and sister of Sachin would be entitled to the following sums:
Loss of dependency - Rs.4,50,000.00 Consortium - Rs. 88,000.00 (44000 X 2) Conventional heads - Rs. 33,000.00
------------------
TOTAL - Rs.5,71,000.00 The entire compensation shall be deposited in a Fixed Deposit for a period of 3 years and shall be paid to his sister - Manjusha.- 19 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011
C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012
17. As stated above, since the Maruti Omni Car was covered under a comprehensive policy, the liability of the insurer to pay the compensation to the inmates of the vehicle cannot be denied. Accordingly, in case of death of Sachin the insurer of the Maruti Omni Car would be liable to pay compensation to the extent of 75% and the insurer of the petrol tanker would be entitled to pay compensation to the extent of 25% of the above sum.
18. As far as the claim relating to the death of the driver * (MFA No.7845/2011), i.e., Sri. Thimmayya, evidence on record shows that he was an employee of MESCOM. The Tribunal has determined the monthly income of Sri. Thimmayya at Rs.10,392/-. To the said sum of Rs.10,392/-, 25% would have to be added towards future prospects which will result in (10,392+2598) Rs.12,990/-, out of which 1/3rd is to be deducted and it would result in Rs.8,660/-. Consequently, the claimants would be entitled to (8,660 X 12 X 14) a sum of Rs.14,54,880/- towards loss of dependency and each of the claimants would also be entitled to a sum of *Deleted vide chamber order dated 30.09.2022 - 20 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011 C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012 Rs.44,000/- each towards loss of consortium and a sum of Rs.33,000/- under conventional heads. Accordingly, wife and daughter of Sri. Thimmayya would be entitled to the following sums:
Loss of dependency - Rs. 14,54,880.00 Consortium - Rs. 88,000.00 (44000 X 2) Conventional heads - Rs. 33,000.00
------------------
TOTAL - Rs.15,75,880.00
19. However, since Sri. Thimmayya himself is held to be responsible to the extent of 75%, his wife and daughter would be entitled to receive only 25% of this compensation form the insurer of the petrol tanker.
Consequently, the appeals filed by them are allowed in part.
20. Consequently, M.F.A. Nos. 2972/2012, 7845/2011 and 7844/2011 are partly allowed and M.F.A. Nos. 7842/2011 and 7841/2011 are disposed off. It is held - 21 - M.F.A No. 7842 /2011 C/W M.F.A Nos. 7841/2011, 7844 /2011, 7845/2011 & 2972/ 2012 that the insurer of Maruti Omni Car would be liable to the payment of compensation to the extent of 75% to the claimants (except in the case of claim relating to the death of Sri. Thimmayya) and the insurer of petrol tanker would be liable to the extent of 25% for the compensation payable to the claimants in the manner stated above.
SD/-
JUDGE LRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21