Karnataka High Court
Sri Hanumanthashetty vs Sigbathulla Khan S/O S M Azeez Khan on 6 December, 2013
Author: S.Abdul Nazeer
Bench: S. Abdul Nazeer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4096/2012 (MV)
Between:
1 Sri Hanumanthashetty,
S/o Nanjashetty,
Aged about 35 years,
R/a Udigala Village,
Chamarajanagar Tq. & Dist.
2 Smt.Nagamma,
W/o Hanumanthashetty,
Aged about 28 years,
R/a Udigala Village,
Chamarajanagar Tq. & Dist. .... Appellants.
(By Sri N. Kumar, Adv.)
And:
1 Sigbathulla Khan,
S/o S.M.Azeez Khan,
Since dead by his L.Rs.
(a) Mumtaj Khan,
W/o late Sigbathulla Khan,
Aged about 50 years.
(b) Fiyaz S/o late Sigbathulla Khan,
Aged about 51 years.
2
(c) Ama D/o late Sigbathulla Khan,
Aged about 29 years.
All are r/a Door No.757,
2nd Cross, Rehamanja Gully,
Chamaraja Mohalla, Mysore.
2 The National Insurance Company Ltd.,
Branch Office, Shopping Arcade,
Mysore,
Reptd. By its Manager.
3 Fairoz,
Door No.736, 3rd Cross,
Rehamanja Street,
Chamaraja Mohalla,
Mysore. .... Respondents.
(By Smt. Geetharaj, Adv. for R2
Notice to R1(a) to R1(c) dispensed with)
---
This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1)
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and award
dated 22.7.2011 in MVC No.1/2003 on the file of the Senior Civil
Judge and CJM, Chamarajanagar, etc.
This Miscellaneous First Appeal coming on for Admission
this day, the Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
This appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgment and award in MVC No.1/2003 dated 22.7.2011 on the file of the 3 Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Chamarajanagar, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,13,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of the deposit.
2. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the deceased was a minor aged about 5 years. In the case of death of a minor in a motor vehicle accident, the Courts have uniformly awarded the compensation in a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- towards pecuniary damages, Rs.75,000/- towards non-pecuniary damages and Rs.75,000/- towards loss of future prospects. The total compensation awarded in such cases is Rs.3,75,000/-. Therefore, the Tribunal has erred in awarding only a sum of Rs.1,80,000/-.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent- Insurance Company has sought to justify the impugned judgment and award. It is his submission that in the case of death of a minor aged 5 years, the question of awarding pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages as contended by the appellants does not arise. 4
4. I have carefully considered the arguments of the learned counsel made at the Bar and perused the materials placed on record.
5. It is not in dispute that the son of the appellants aged 5 years died in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 29.7.1996. Respondent-Insurance Company does not dispute its liability to pay the compensation. This Court in THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD., VS. SRI SUBHASH KALLAPPA AND ANOTHER - 2012 KANT M.A.C. 346 (KANT), has considered a similar question in detail and has awarded compensation in a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-. The decisions of the Apex Court in R. K. MALIK VS. KIRAN PAL - 2009 (8) SCALE 451, and in R.D.HATTANGADI VS. PEST CONTROL (INDIA) (P) LTD., - 1995 (1) SCC 551 and several decisions of the Apex Court have been followed while deciding the matter.
6. Delhi High Court in MOHD. AYYUB AND ANOTHER VS. SATISH KUMAR GUPTA AND OTHERS - 2010 (1) T.A.C. 931 (Del.), has considered the award of damages to the parents of a minor child aged about 7 years, who died in a motor vehicle 5 accident. It has taken note of several decisions of the Apex Court including R. K. MALIK and R. D. HATTANGADI's cases (supra). It has been held as under:
"This case is squarely covered by the aforesaid judgment of this Court which related to the case of 7 years old. Following the aforesaid judgment, Rs.2,25,000/- is awarded towards pecuniary damages following the Second Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act, Rs.75,000/- is awarded towards non-pecuniary damages and Rs.75,000/- is awarded towards future prospects. The total compensation awarded is Rs.3,75,000/-."
7. Having regard to the decisions referred to above, I am of the view that the claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.3,75,000/-.
8. The Tribunal while determining the compensation payable to the claimants has directed the owner and the insurer of the offending vehicle to deposit the compensation within 30 days from the date of the judgment and award. It has been further held that if 6 the compensation is not deposited as above, the claimants are entitled for interest at the rate of 6% from the date of the petition till the date of deposit. Thus, payment of interest is made conditional, which in my opinion, cannot be sustained. The claimants are entitled for interest on the entire compensation from the date of the petition till the date of deposit.
9. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,13,000/-, which has to be deducted from the said amount. The balance of compensation comes to Rs.2,62,000/-. The claimants are entitled for interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the said amount from the date of the application till the date of deposit. The claimants are also entitled for interest at the rate of 6% per annum on Rs.1,13,000/- awarded by the Tribunal from the date of the petition till the date of its deposit before the Tribunal.
10. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. The respondent-Insurance Company is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.2,62,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the application till the date of deposit within a period of six weeks from 7 the date of receipt of copy of this order. The respondent-Insurance Company is also directed to deposit interest on Rs.1,13,000/- from the date of the petition till the date of its deposit before the Tribunal. The appellants are permitted to withdraw the said amount in equal proportion. No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE.
BMM/-