Karnataka High Court
Smt Sufia vs Ramachandra Murthy D A on 6 March, 2020
Author: S R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
M.F.A. NO.8545/2018 (MV - D)
C/W
M.F.A.NO.3448/2019
IN M.F.A.NO.8545/2018
BETWEEN:
1. SMT.SUFIA,
W/O LATE PYARU,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
2. IMRAN KHAN,
S/O LATE PYARU,
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS,
3. SAMEER,
S/O LATE PYARU,
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
ALENAHALLI VILLAGE,
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK,
CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT - 577 101.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI.VENKATE GOWDA K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. RAMACHANDRA MURTHY D.A.,
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
2
S/O HALAPPA D.K.,
R/O C-3, CDA LAYOUT,
PRANJALA, KALYANANAGARA,
CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
CRESCENT COURT, K.M.ROAD,
CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
20.07.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.407/2017 ON THE FILE OF
THE 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AMACT,
CHIKKAMAGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN M.F.A.NO.3448/2019
BETWEEN:
BRANCH MANAGER,
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
CRESCENT COURT, K.M.ROAD,
CHIKKAMAGALURU,
REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
CHIKKAMAGALUR - 577101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.RAVISH BENNI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT.SUFIA,
W/O LATE PYARU,
3
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
HOUSE WIFE,
2. IMRAN KHAN,
S/O LATE PYARU,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
3. SAMEER,
S/O LATE PYARU,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT
ALENAHALLI VILLAGE,
CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK
AND DISTRICT - 577 101.
4. RAMACHANDRA MURTHY D.A.,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
S/O HALAPPA,
R/O C-3, CDA LAYOUT,
PRANJALA, KALYANANAGARA,
CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.VENKATE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3;
NOTICE FOR R4 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE
ORDER DATED 06.03.2020)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
20.07.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.407/2017 ON THE FILE OF
THE 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AMACT,
CHIKKAMAGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF
RS.8,92,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
THESE M.F.As. COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
4
JUDGMENT
MFA No.8545/2018 has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, whereas MFA No.3448/2019 is filed by the Insurance Company seeking reduction of compensation.
2. By impugned judgment and award dated 20.07.2018 passed in M.V.C.No.407/2017 the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.8,92,000/- together with interest at 8% p.a. on account of the death of one Pyaru in a road traffic accident that occurred on 27.04.2017.
3. 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 these appeals are restricted to quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants - claimants submits that the Tribunal committed an error in taking the notional income as Rs.8,000/- instead of Rs.10,000/- per 5 month as per the Lok Adalat guidelines. It is also contended that the Tribunal committed an error in not adding 25% 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.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance company would support the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
6. I have given my careful consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
7. 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 2017, the notional income should be taken as Rs.10,000/- per month 6 and in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case, the Tribunal ought to have added 25% of future prospects to the notional income of Rs.10,000/- per month, since the deceased was aged about 50 years as on the date of the accident. Hence, the compensation under the head 'loss of dependency' is reworked as hereunder:-
(Rs.10,000 + 25% = Rs.12,500/- 50% = Rs.6,250/-
Rs.6,250 x 12 x 13 = Rs.9,75,000/-) Hence, the appellants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.9,75,000/- under this head. So also the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.70,000/- under conventional heads.
8. Thus, in all, the appellants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.10,45,000/-. Since the Tribunal has already awarded compensation of Rs.8,92,000/-, the appellants - claimants would be entitled to an additional enhanced compensation of Rs.1,53,000/- with interest at 6% p.a.
9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following order:-
7
(i) MFA No.8545/2018 is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 20.07.2018 passed by the Tribunal in M.V.C.No.407/2017 is hereby modified.
(iii) The appellants - claimants are entitled to additional enhanced compensation of Rs.1,53,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. as against 7.5% awarded by the Tribunal, 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.
Registry is directed to transmit the amount in deposit to the Tribunal for disbursement.
MFA No.3448/2019 filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Mgn/-