Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
ON THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.L.MANJUNATH
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5007 OF 2013(MV)
BETWEEN:
National Insurance Co. Ltd., Regional Office, No.144, Subharam Complex, M.G.Road, Bangalore – 560 001 Represented by its Deputyn Manager Mr.A.Ghani. …APPELLANT
(By Sri K.S.Laxminarasappa, Advocate for Sri B.S.Seetharama Rao, Advocate)
AND:
Smt.Asha Pareek Aged about 46 years,
2 W/o Vishnu Prakash Pareek
Miss.Jyothi Aged about 26 years D/o Vishnu Prakash Pareek
Miss.Ruchi @ Pooja Aged about 20 years S/o Vishnu Prakash Pareek
Miss.Seema @ Lali Aged about 17 years D/o Vishnu Prakash Pareek
Chi.Ashutosh @ Ashish Aged about 14 years D/o Vishnu Prakash Pareek
Respondents No.4 & 5 are minors Rep. by their mother the Respondent No.1 herein
All are residing at No.82, Nagola, Via-Bhinai, Kekri Taluk, Ajmeer District, Rajasthan State.
Sri Vinayaka P Major, S/o Panduranga Residing at No.1017/4 Vijayananda Nagar Slum Mani Road, Rajajinagar, Bangalore – 560 096. …RESPONDENTS
3 *****
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated 5.3.2013 passed in MVC.No.3219/2012 on the file of the 21st Additional Small Causes Judge, 19th ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Member, MACT, Bangalore, awarding a compensation of Rs.21,37,900/- with interest @ 6% P.A. from the date of petition till payment.
This MFA coming on for admission this day, Ravi Malimath J., delivered the following:-
JUDGMENT
The case of the claimants is that on 28.12.2011 at about 9.45 p.m., when the deceased was riding his TVS XL moped bearing registration No.KA-04-HF-2106 from Maruthi Circle, Sadashivanagar towards Vyalikaval main road, the rider of the motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-02-HG-2069, jumped the signal and dashed against him. The deceased Vishnu prakash Pareek fell down and sustained fatal injuries. He was shifted to NIMHANS Hospital and then shifted to Columbia Asia Hospital, and died on 31.12.2011.
4 His legal representatives filed a claim petition under Section-166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.21,37,900/-, along with interest. Questioning the excessive grant of compensation, the insurer has filed this appeal.
The contention of the insurer is that 1/5th deduction towards personal expenses is inappropriate. Since the second claimant, who is the daughter of the deceased was married as on the date of the accident, therefore she was not a dependent. Hence, the deduction towards personal expenses has to be reduced to 1/4th. On considering the same, we are of the considered view that the contention requires to be accepted. Even otherwise, if there are five dependents, the appropriate deduction should have been 1/4th. The Tribunal therefore, committed an error
5 in deducting 1/5th. Hence, the same requires to be modified. So far as the income is concerned, the Tribunal on placing reliance in terms of Exhibit-P20, namely, the Income Tax Returns for the assessment year 2010-2011, has rightly assessed the income of the deceased. We do not find any error in accepting the said income. Hence, the loss of dependency by deducting 1/4th stands altered as follows: = Rs.2,36,124 (less) Rs.59,031 (1/4th) = Rs.1,77,093/- x 11 = Rs.19,48,023/-
Further, towards loss of estate, loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, etc. the Tribunal has awarded Rs.60,000/- in all. We are of the considered view that the same is on a meager side. It is therefore, just and appropriate to award a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- in all, so far as these heads are concerned. The difference in compensation on loss of
6 dependency after deducting 1/4th towards personal expenses would be Rs.1,29,868/-. We propose to award another sum of Rs.1,40,000/- towards conventional heads. Moreover, the material on record would show that the accident occurred on 28.12.2011. He was treated in NIMHANS and Columbia Asia Hospital, where he died on 31.12.2011, namely four days after the accident. No amount was awarded towards, medical expenses. Therefore, taking into consideration the reduction of the amount towards loss of dependency, since the amounts towards conventional heads is a paltry sum and no amount is awarded towards medical expenses, the amount awarded by the Tribunal on the over all facts and circumstances of the case, appears to be just and appropriate. It cannot be said that the Tribunal has granted an over all excessive compensation. Keeping this in mind we are of the view that the overall
7 compensation is just and appropriate. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.
The amount in deposit is directed to be transmitted to the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/- JUDGE