Smt Rajamma vs Sri Narayana M on 5 March, 2020

[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Rajamma vs Sri Narayana M on 5 March, 2020

Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 KAR 500

Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar

                          1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2020

                        BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

              M.F.A.NO.2311 OF 2018 (MV-D)

BETWEEN

1.    SMT. RAJAMMA
      W/O LATE LAKSHMANA
      AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS.

2.    SHIVARAJU V.L
      S/O LATE LAKSHMANA
      AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS.

3.    ROOPA V.L
      D/O LATE LAKSHMANA
      AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS

      ALL ARE R/AT D.V.HALLI
      DABBEGATTA POST,
      DODDERI HOBLI
      MADUGIRI TALUK,
      NOW R/AT AREKERE
      ANTARSANA HALLI
      TUMAKURU TALUK - 572 106.
                                             ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.K.SHANTHARAJ, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.    SRI NARAYANA.M
      S/O LATE MANJUNATH
      AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
      R/AT ANTHARASANAHALLI
      AREKERE POST
                               2



      TUMAKURU - 572 106.

2.    THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
      COMPANY LTD.,
      REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
      OPP. TO RAMAMANDIRA
      BAR LINE ROAD
      K.R.EXTENSION
      TUMAKURU CITY - 572 101.
                                             ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. A.M.VENKATESH, ADVOCATE)

      THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:
15.06.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.727/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE
VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND
MEMBER,     ADDITIONAL    MACT,   TUMAKURU,     PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                         JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by the claimant challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 15.06.2017 passed by the VI Addl. District and Sessions Judge and Member, MACT at Tumakuru (for short 'the Tribunal') in M.V.C.No.727/2016, awarding a sum of Rs.7,75,000/- together with interest at 7.5% p.a. on account of the death of 3 one Laxmana in a road traffic accident that occurred on 16.04.2016.

2. Both the counsels submit that the occurrence of accident as well as the coverage of the policy of the offending vehicle by the Insurance company are not in dispute and this appeal is restricted to quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant-claimant submits that the Tribunal committed an error in taking the notional income as Rs.7,500/- instead of Rs.9,500/- per month as per the Lok Adalat guidelines. It is also contended that the Tribunal committed an error in not adding 10% of future prospects to the notional income without considering or appreciating the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others (2017) 16 SCC 680. He therefore requests this Court to enhance the compensation by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. 4

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent- Insurance company would support the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.

5. I have given my careful consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record.

6. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellants, the Tribunal committed an error in failing to appreciate the Lok Adalat guidelines which stipulate that in respect of an accident that took place in the year 2016, the notional income should be taken as Rs.9,500/- per month and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case, the Tribunal ought to have added 10% of future prospects to the notional income of Rs.9,500/- per month, since the deceased was aged about 52 years as on the date of the accident. Hence, the compensation under the head 'loss of dependency' is reworked as hereunder:-

Rs.9,500/- + 10% = Rs.10,450/-

Rs.10,450/- x 12 x 11 x 2/3 = Rs.9,19,600/- 5 Hence, the appellants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.9,19,600/- under this head. So also the appellants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs.1,15,000/- under conventional heads.

7. Thus, in all, the appellant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.10,34,600/-. Since the Tribunal has already awarded compensation of Rs.7,75,000/-, the appellants - claimants would be entitled to an additional enhanced compensation of Rs.2,59,600/- with interest at 6% p.a.

8. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following order:-

(i) The appeal is partly allowed.

(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 15.06.2017 passed by the VI Addl. District and Sessions Judge and Member, MACT at Tumakuru, is hereby modified. 6

(iii) The appellants are entitled to additional enhanced compensation of Rs.2,59,600/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realization.

(iv) The apportionment and disbursement to be done as per the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.

Sd/-

JUDGE bnv

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court