Karnataka High Court
Ramanna vs Y.B. Mahesh on 16 January, 2020
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
M.F.A.No.140/2017
BETWEEN:
1. RAMANNA,
S/O PATEL KAMEGOWD,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
2. LAKSHMAMMA, W/O RAMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF
KATAVEERANAHALLI VILLAGE,
KALLAMBELLA HOBLI,
SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. RAMESH K.R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. Y.B.MAHESH,
S/O BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/O SHANTHINAGARA, GOOD SHED COLONY,
TUMKUR-572 101.
2. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO., LTD.,
1ST FLOOR, T.G.M.C. BUILDING,
B.H. ROAD, TUMKUR-572 101.
REPRESENTED BY ITS
BRANCH MANAGER ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.N.KESHAVA PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
2
THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED:16.09.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.627/2014 ON THE
FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, ADDITIONAL
MACT, SIRA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The Claimant is in appeal being dissatisfied with award of compensation of Rs.6,82,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
2. It was case of the claimants that their son - Maradirangantha, was riding his TVS moped bearing Reg. No.KA-06-EL-9115 on Tumkur -Sira Service road, near L.H Palya gate, when the rider of the motor cycle came with high speed and collided with the vehicle of the deceased, as a result of which, their son sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot.
3. It is contended that the deceased was an earning member of the family and due to his sudden death, they were put to great hardship and financial loss and they were, therefore entitled to Rs.20,00,000/- as compensation. 3
4. The petition was contested by both the owner as well as the insurance company, and they both generally denied all the averments made in the petition.
5. The Tribunal on consideration of the evidence adduced before it, came to the conclusion that the accident had occurred on 30.12.2013 in which the claimants' son was killed and the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.6,82,000/- .
6. The learned counsel for the claimants contended that in arriving at the said compensation, for the purpose of calculating the loss of dependency of the deceased, the Tribunal has assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6000/- p.m., which is incorrect. The said contention merits consideration.
7. The notional income of the deceased is to be taken at Rs.8000/- p.m as per the guidelines issued by Karnataka State Legal Services authority as the accident is of the year 2013. In view of the judgment rendered in Pranay Sethi's case, future prospects of 40% is to be added to the said sum of Rs.8,000/-. As a consequence, the monthly income of the 4 deceased would be Rs.11,200/-. The deceased was a bachelor and hence 50% is to be deducted towards his personal expenses. Hence the income would be Rs.5,600/-. The claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.11,42,400/- (Rs.5,600 x 12 x17) towards loss of dependency in place of Rs.6,12,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In addition to this, the claimants being parents of the deceased would be entitled for a sum of Rs.40,000/- each towards love and affection together in all Rs.80,000/-. The claimants are also entitled for a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards funeral expenses. Hence the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.12,52,400/- as against Rs. 6,82,000/- awarded by the Tribunal along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of payment as awarded by the Tribunal. The other terms regarding apportionment and deposit shall be as ordered by the Tribunal. The appeal is allowed in part.
Sd/-
JUDGE NM