Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
- 1 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.303 OF 2015 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.302 OF 2015(MV-D) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.304 OF 2015 (MV-D) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.305 OF 2015 (MV-D)
IN MFA NO.303/2015 BETWEEN:
SMT. K.KALLAMMA W/O K.BASAVANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
K. BASAVANTHAPPA S/O LATE K RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
K. B. VEERABHADRESWARA S/O K. BASAVANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
SMT. S. B. SHASHIKALA D/O K. BASAVANTHAPPA, W/O S. B. PRABHUPRASAD, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/O. OPP UNION PARK AREA, DAVANAGERE ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by PAVITHRA B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
AND:
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE, MAGANURU COMMERICAL COMPLEX, B. D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
A. KANDASWAMY S/O APPUCHI GOUNDER, 153,VELLAKAR STREET, PAKALIYUR POST,SANKAGIRI TALUK, SALEM-637 301,TAMILNADU, OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING REG NO.TN-52-A-8314
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS MANAGER SHARADA COMPLEX, OPPOSITE KSRTC BUS STAND, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
K. BASAVANTHAPPA S/O LATE K RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. OPPOSITE TO UNION PARK AREA, B. D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H.N KESHAVAPRASHANTH,ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI R.GUNASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 NOTICE TO R2 & R4 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE COURT ORDER DTD 24.07.2015 )
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.07.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.487/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & CJM, MACT-III, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
- 3 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
IN MFA NO.302/2015 BETWEEN:
K. BASAVANTHAPPA S/O LATE K. RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
SMT. K. KALLAMMA W/O K BASAVANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
BOTH ARE R/O. OPP UNION PARK AREA, DAVANAGERE ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE, MAGANURU COMMERICAL COMPLEX, B. D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
A. KANDASWAMY S/O APPUCHI GOUNDER, 153,VELLAKAR STREET, PAKALIYUR POST,SANKAGIRI TALUK, SALEM-637 301,TAMILNADU, OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING REG NO.TN-52-A-8314
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS MANAGER SHARADA COMPLEX, OPPOSITE KSRTC BUS STAND, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
- 4 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
K. BASAVANTHAPPA S/O LATE K RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. OPPOSITE TO UNION PARK AREA, B. D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H N KESHAVAPRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI R GUNASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 NOTICE TO R2 & R4 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE COURT ORDER DTD 10.09.2015)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.07.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.486/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, C.J.M & MACT-III, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA NO.304/2015 BETWEEN:
K BASAVANTHAPPA S/O LATE K RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, 2. SMT K KALLAMMA W/O K BASAVANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
BOTH ARE R/O OPP UNION PARK AREA, DAVANAGERE ROAD, CHITRADURGA-577 501 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N, ADVOCATE)
- 5 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
AND:
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE, MAGANURU COMMERICAL COMPLEX, B. D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
A. KANDASWAMY S/O APPUCHI GOUNDER, 153,VELLAKAR STREET, PAKALIYUR POST,SANKAGIRI TALUK, SALEM-637 301,TAMILNADU, OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING REG NO.TN-52-A-8314
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS MANAGER SHARADA COMPLEX, OPPOSITE KSRTC BUS STAND, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
K. BASAVANTHAPPA S/O LATE K RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. OPPOSITE TO UNION PARK AREA, B. D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H N KESHAVAPRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI R GUNASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 NOTICE TO R2 & R4 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE COURT ORDER DTD 15.09.2015)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.07.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.488/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, C.J.M & MACT-III, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING
- 6 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA NO.305/2015 BETWEEN:
K BASAVANTHAPPA S/O LATE K RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS,
SMT K KALLAMMA W/O K BASAVANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS,
BOTH ARE R/O OPP UNION PARK AREA, DAVANAGERE ROAD, CHITRADURGA-577 501 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE N, ADVOCATE)
AND: 1. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE, MAGANURU COMMERICAL COMPLEX, B. D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501 2. A. KANDASWAMY S/O APPUCHI GOUNDER, 153,VELLAKAR STREET, PAKALIYUR POST,SANKAGIRI TALUK, SALEM-637 301,TAMILNADU, OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING REG NO.TN-52-A-8314
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS MANAGER SHARADA COMPLEX, OPPOSITE KSRTC BUS STAND, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
- 7 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
K. BASAVANTHAPPA S/O LATE K RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/O. OPPOSITE TO UNION PARK AREA, B. D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA - 577 501
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H N KESHAVAPRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI R GUNASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R2 & R4 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE COURT ORDER DTD 13.06.2016 )
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.07.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.489/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & CJM, MACT-III, CHITRDURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
MFA Nos.303, 302, 304 and 305 of 2015 are filed by the Claimants questioning negligence fastened on the deceased at 50% and also seeking for enhancement of compensation.
Brief facts of the case are as under:
- 8 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
On 1.6.2003 deceased K.B.Basaveswara, his wife Shobha and their sons K.B.Tejas and K.B.Rajesh were traveling in Maruti Omni Van bearing registration No.KA- 16-M-2526.
At about 4.30 pm., when deceased Basaveswara was driving the said Maruthi Omni near Bhogalerahatti village on National Highway 13, all of a sudden the driver of lorry bearing registration No.TN-52- A-8314 came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the said Maruthi Omni. In the said accident, deceased Basaveswara, his wife and one of his sons died at the spot and the other son died on the way to the hospital.
Hence, four claim petitions were filed under Section-166 of the M.V. Act, by appellants/claimants 1 and 2 claiming compensation for the death of their son, daughter-in-law and grand children contending that the deceased was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. He was a partner in Gurubasaveswara & Co.,
- 9 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
situated at APMC yard, Chitradurga since 1990-91 and was earning a sum of `3 lakhs per annum. He was also owning six and half acres of arecanut and coconut garden at Katihalli and Gundimadu village and was earning a sum of `3 lakhs per annum. It was contended that the wife of deceased Smt Shobha was doing tailoring and embroidery work in the house and was earning `4,000/- per month. That the minor children were studying in 6th standard. The appellants/claimants 1 and 2, who are the parents were depending upon the earning of the deceased. The Tribunal on appreciating the materials on record, allowed the petitions in part, and awarded a compensation of Rs.12,85,500/- MVC No.487/2013, `2,50,000/- in MVC No.486/2013 and in MVC No.489/2013 and `4,09,000/- in MVC No.488/2013 along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The Tribunal held contributory negligence on the part of the deceased also at
- 10 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
50% and accordingly, held that respondent Nos.1 and 2 therein, are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. The appellants/claimants are before this Court questioning negligence on the part of the deceased and seeking enhancement of compensation.
Heard the learned Counsel on both sides and perused the records.
The learned Counsel for the claimants submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in holding that there is contributory negligence at 50% on the part of the deceased in causing the accident but the accident had occurred entirely due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry. Therefore, he prays to modify the finding regarding contributory negligence. He submitted that the accident had occurred on the Highway of Hospet to Chitradurga. The place of accident is at a curve of the Highway. The lorry was coming from Chitradurga side towards Hospet and while taking the curve, the driver of the lorry moved beyond the
- 11 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
middle area and hit the Maruthi Omni which was being driven by the deceased on its correct side. Therefore, he submitted that the driver of the lorry was driving the lorry in a rash and negligent manner and caused the accident. He further submitted that the income taken by the Tribunal is on lesser side resulting in awarding a lesser amount of compensation and prays for enhancement of compensation. Hence, he prays to allow the appeal.
On the other hand, learned Counsel for Respondent No.1 - insurance company who is insurer of the lorry submitted that the Tribunal is correct in holding that both the drivers are equally responsible in causing the accident and accordingly fastened contributory negligence at 50% on each of the drivers. He further submitted that the place of accident is at the curve of the road. Therefore, the deceased who was driving the Maruthi Omni is also equally responsible in causing the accident and the finding of the Tribunal in this regard is just proper. He
- 12 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
further submitted that so far as the income of the deceased taken by the Tribunal while calculating the compensation is concerned, the same is on higher side. However, the insurance company has not preferred any appeal. Hence, he submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. Hence, he prays to confirm the same. He further submitted that so far as the compensation awarded for the death of wife and children of deceased is concerned, the quantum of compensation awarded is just and proper. He further submitted that so far as the income of the wife of the deceased is concerned, the income declared is at `4,000/- per month by doing tailoring work and therefore, the Tribunal is correct in awarding the quantum of compensation and prays to confirm the same. Hence, he prays to dismiss the appeals filed by the claimants.
- 13 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
Upon considering the scenario of the accident, it is seen that the deceased was driving Maruthi Omni Car bearing No.KA-16-M.2526 from Kottur towards Chitradurga and lorry bearing No.TN-52/A.8314 was coming in the opposite direction from Chitradurga to Kottur. The road is a National Highway from Hospet to Chitradurga. The place of accident is at the curve of the National Highway. The place of accident is shown as middle of the road. Ex.P1 is a copy of the complaint. Ex.P2 is the FIR copy. Ex.P3 is spot panchanama. Upon considering the complaint, FIR, spot panchanama, spot sketch-Ex.R2 and charge sheet - Ex.P42 it is seen that Maruthi Omni was being driven from Kottur to Chitradurga and lorry was coming from Chitradurga to Hospet. Kottur and Hospet are in the same direction. The place of accident shows that Maruthi Omni was on its left side, however the lorry had gone slightly right side of its direction and dashed Maruthi Omni. When there is a curve and Maruthi Omni Car was on its right way, the lorry ought to have maintained its way. But without maintaining the
- 14 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
same, the lorry being slightly towards right side of the road, it dashed against Maruthi Omni. The deceased could have also avoided the accident. But, unfortunately due to the circumstances, the accident is caused. The police have conducted investigation and filed charge sheet against the deceased as well as the driver of the lorry. Upon considering the entire scenario of the accident, applying the principle of res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself) the driver of the lorry is found to be very rash and negligent in driving the lorry and causing the accident compared to the deceased. Therefore, the apportionment of contributory negligence at 50% each by the Tribunal is not just and proper. For the reasons discussed herein above, the contributory negligence is fixed at 70% on the part of the driver of the lorry and 30% on the part of the deceased. Accordingly, the apportionment of contributory negligence is modified as here in above.
- 15 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
I. MFA NO.303/2015 (MVC NO.487/2013) : 8. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is as follows: Loss Dependency (7500 x 12 x 50% x 14)
: Rs. 12,60,000/- Funeral Expenditure : Rs. 25,000/- TOTAL : Rs. 12,85,000/-
The Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased as Rs.15,000/- per month and has accordingly awarded compensation. The learned counsel for the claimant submitted that the deceased was working as a partner in Sri.Gurubasaveshwara And Co., which is a Partnership Firm. Besides having income from the said partnership firm, the deceased was also having income from the agricultural lands. Therefore, submitted that the income taken by the Tribunal is on lesser side. Therefore, prays for enhancement of the compensation by holding a higher amount of income of the deceased.
- 16 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
The claimants have produced documentary evidence regarding declaration of total turnover of partnership firm to the Karnataka Commercial Tax Department. Exhibit-P9 is the License Certificate, which shows that the deceased was one of the partner of the partnership firm. Exhibit-P10 to P13 are Auditors Report. Exhibit-P14 is the letter of Commercial tax office. Exhibit- P15 is VAT paid receipt and Exhibit-P43 is the Income tax Return. The claimants have produced the declaration of total turnover from the period from 2008-2009 till 2012- 2013 except for the year 2011-2012. For the year March’2008, the total turnover declaration is Rs.56,47,708/-, for the March’2009 the total turnover is Rs.76,31,602/-, for March’2010 the total turnover is Rs.66,39,676/- for March’2011 the total turnover declaration is Rs.1,30,42,350/-, for the March’2013 the total turnover is Rs.1,51,83,177/-.
- 17 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
From the above, it is seen that the deceased was income tax assessee and the brother of the deceased and the deceased were in partnership business. Accordingly, on the basis of the evidence produced, it is clear that the deceased was receiving income from partnership business also. However, the claimants have not produced Income Tax Assessment and returns, to prove exactly how much income the deceased was earning. Therefore, in this regard without any basis and reasoning the Tribunal has held the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per month, which is on lesser side the same is not proper. Therefore, the income is considered as Rs.20,000/- per month. As per the principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi1, 25% of the income is added towards 'loss of future prospects in life'. There are four dependants of the deceased. Therefore, 1/4th of the earnings would be deducted towards ‘personal and living expenses’. The deceased was
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
- 18 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
aged 40 years at the time of the accident. Therefore, the appropriate multiplier applicable as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Smt.Sarla Verma & Others. Vs. Delhi Transport Corpn And Another2 is ‘14’. Therefore, the compensation under the head ‘Loss Of Dependency along with Loss of Future Prospects in Life’ is recalculated and quantified as follows: Rs.20,000 + 5,000 (25% of 20,000) x 3/4 x 14 x 12 = Rs.31,50,000/-
The Tribunal has committed error in not awarding compensation ‘Loss Of Consortium and Love And Affection’. Therefore, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of Magma General Insurance Co. Limited v. Nanu Ram & Others3 and in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay
2 AIR 2009 SC 3104 3 2018 ACJ 2782
- 19 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
Sethi4, the four claimants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each under the head ‘Loss Of Consortium’, along with 10% escalation. Accordingly, Rs.1,76,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 4 + 10%) is awarded under the head ‘Loss Of Consortium including Loss Of Love And Affection’.
Further, a compensation of Rs.15,000/- each is awarded under the head ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’ respectively, along with 10% escalation. Therefore, Rs.33,000/- (Rs.15,000 x 2 + 10%) towards ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’.
Thus, in all the appellants/claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation as follows: Loss Dependency (Rs.20,000 + 5,000 (25% x 20,000) x ¾ x 14 x 12) : Rs. 31,50,000/- Loss of Consortium (Rs.40,000 x 4 + 10%) : Rs. 1,76,000/-
4 (2017) 16 SCC 680
- 20 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
Loss of Estate : Rs. 16,500/- Funeral and Transportation Expenditure : Rs. 16,500/- TOTAL : Rs. 33,59,000/-
Therefore, the appellants-claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.33,59,000/- as against Rs.12,85,000/-. The appellants – claimants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.20,74,000/- (Rs.33,59,000 – Rs.12,85,000) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. However, the appellants-claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 72 days in filing the appeal. REGARDING NEGLIGENCE : 16. As held by the Tribunal, the deceased has contributed 30% negligence towards the accident. Therefore, respondent No.1 – insurance company is liable to pay 70% of total compensation awarded above.
- 21 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
Respondent No.3 – Insurance company who is the insurer of the offending Maruthi Omni Van No.KA-16-M-M.2526, has already paid the compensation under personal accident coverage of Rs.2,00,000/-, which is confirmed. Therefore, 70% of the compensation excluding Rs.2,00,000/-, may be paid to the claimants-appellants. II. MFA NO.302/2015 (MVC NO.486/2013) : 17. The Tribunal has awarded global compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- in MFA No.302/2015 (MVC No.486/2013) needs modification by applying the principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of KISHAN GOPAL AND ANOTHER –V- LALA AND OTHERS5 the notional income is taken at Rs.30,000/- per annum, since the deceased is a minor aged 12 years and applying the multiplier of younger age of the parent, who in the present case is the grandmother aged 60 years. Hence, the appropriate multiplier applicable is ‘9’.
5 (2014) 1 SCC 244
- 22 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
Therefore, the ‘loss of dependency’ is hereby reassessed and quantified as follows: Rs.30,000 x 9 = Rs.2,70,000/-
Further, there are two claimants who are the grandfather and grandmother of the deceased are entitled for ‘Loss of Consortium’, along with 10% escalation. Hence, a sum of Rs.88,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 2 + 10%) is awarded under the head ‘Loss Of Consortium including Loss Of Love And Affection’. 19. Further, a compensation of Rs.15,000/- each is awarded under the head ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’ respectively, along with 10% escalation. Therefore, Rs.33,000/- (Rs.15,000 x 2 + 10%) towards ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’.
Thus, in all the appellants/claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation as follows:
- 23 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
Loss Dependency (Rs.30,000 x 9) : Rs. 2,70,000/- Loss of Consortium (Rs.40,000 x 2 + 10%) : Rs. 88,000/- Loss of Estate : Rs. 16,500/- Funeral and Transportation Expenditure : Rs. 16,500/- TOTAL : Rs. 3,91,000/-
Therefore, the appellants-claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.3,91,000/- as against Rs.2,50,000/-. The appellants – claimants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.1,41,000/- (Rs.3,91,000 – Rs.2,50,000) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. However, the appellants-claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 72 days in filing the appeal.
- 24 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
III. MFA NO.305/2015 (MVC NO.486/2013) : 22. In this case, the Tribunal has awarded global compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- needs modification by applying the principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of KISHAN GOPAL AND ANOTHER –V- LALA AND OTHERS6 the notional income is taken at Rs.30,000/- per annum, since the deceased is a minor aged 12 years and applying the multiplier of younger age of the parent, who in the present case is the grandmother aged 60 years. Hence, the appropriate multiplier applicable is ‘9’. Therefore, the loss of dependency is hereby reassessed and quantified as follows: Rs.30,000 x 9 = Rs.2,70,000/- 23. Further, there are two claimants who are the grandfather and grandmother of the deceased are entitled for ‘Loss Of Consortium’, along with 10% escalation. Hence, a sum of Rs.88,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 2 + 10%) is
6 (2014) 1 SCC 244
- 25 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
awarded under the head ‘Loss Of Consortium including Loss Of Love And Affection’. 24. Further, a compensation of Rs.15,000/- each is awarded under the head ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’ respectively, along with 10% escalation. Therefore, Rs.33,000/- (Rs.15,000 x 2 + 10%) towards ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’.
Thus, in all the appellants/claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation as follows: Loss Dependency (Rs.30,000 x 9) : Rs. 2,70,000/- Loss of Consortium (Rs.40,000 x 2 + 10%) : Rs. 88,000/- Loss of Estate : Rs. 16,500/- Funeral and Transportation Expenditure : Rs. 16,500/- TOTAL : Rs. 3,91,000/-
- 26 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
Therefore, the appellants-claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.3,91,000/- as against Rs.2,50,000/-. The appellants – claimants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.1,41,000/- (Rs.3,91,000 – Rs.2,50,000) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. However, the appellants-claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 94 days in filing the appeal. IV. MFA NO.304/2015 (MVC NO.488/2013) : 27. In the present case, the claimants are the parents-in-law of the deceased is K.B.Shoabha, wife of deceased Basavanthappa. The Tribunal has taken income of Rs.4,000/- per month. Considering the year of the accident occurred in the year 2013. The notional income ought to be taken at Rs.8,000/-, as per as per Chart of notional income recognized by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. As per the principle of law laid down by
- 27 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
the Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi7 and in the case of New India Assurance Company Vs. Abdul S/o Mehaboob Tahasildar8, 40% of the income is added towards 'loss of future prospects in life'. There are two dependants of the deceased. Half of the amount is deducted towards ‘personal and living expenses’. The deceased was aged 35 years at the time of accident. The appropriate multiplier applicable as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Smt.Sarla Verma & Others. Vs. Delhi Transport Corpn And Another9 is ‘16’. Therefore, the compensation under the head ‘Loss Of Dependency along with Loss of Future Prospects in Life’ is recalculated and quantified as follows: Rs.8,000 + 3,200 (40% of 8,000) x 50% x 16 x 12 = Rs.10,75,200/-
7 (2017) 16 SCC 680 8 MFA.NO.103807/2016 C/W MFA.NOS.103835/2016 & 103807/2018 DD.27.05.2022
9 AIR 2009 SC 3104
- 28 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
Further, there are two claimants who are the grandfather and grandmother of the deceased are entitled for ‘Loss Of Consortium’, alongwith 10% escalation. Hence, a sum of Rs.88,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 2 + 10%) is awarded under the head ‘Loss Of Consortium including Loss Of Love And Affection’. 29. Further, a compensation of Rs.15,000/- each is awarded under the head ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’ respectively, along with 10% escalation. Therefore, Rs.33,000/- (Rs.15,000 x 2 + 10%) towards ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’.
Thus, in all the appellants/claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation as follows: Loss Dependency Rs.8,000 + 3,200 (40% of 8,000) x 50% x 16 x 12 : Rs. 10,75,200/- Loss of Consortium (Rs.40,000 x 2 + 10%) : Rs. 88,000/- Loss of Estate : Rs. 16,500/-
- 29 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
Funeral and Transportation Expenditure : Rs. 16,500/- TOTAL : Rs. 11,96,200/-
Therefore, the appellants-claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.11,96,200/- as against Rs.4,09,000/-. The appellants – claimants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.7,87,200/- (Rs.11,96,200 – Rs.4,09,000) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. However, the appellants-claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 72 days in filing the appeal.
- 30 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i. MFA NO.303/2015 (MVC NO.487/2013) is Allowed In Part. The appellants – claimants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.20,74,000/- (Rs.33,59,000 – Rs.12,85,000) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. However, the appellants-claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 72 days in filing the appeal.
ii. In MFA NO.303/2015 (MVC NO.487/2013) : respondent No.1 is liable to pay 70% of total compensation determined above. Respondent No.3 – Insurance company who is the insurer of the offending Maruthi Omni Van No.KA-16-M-
- 31 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
M.2526, has already paid the compensation under personal accident coverage of Rs.2,00,000/-, which is confirmed.
iii. MFA NO.302/2015 (MVC NO.486/2013) is Allowed In Part. The appellants – claimants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.1,41,000/- (Rs.3,91,000 – Rs.2,50,000) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. However, the appellants-claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 72 days in filing the appeal.
iv. MFA NO.305/2015 (MVC NO.*489/2013) is Allowed In Part. The appellants – claimants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.1,41,000/- (Rs.3,91,000 – Rs.2,50,000) along with interest at 6% per annum from the * Corrected vide chamber order dated 26.07.2023
- 32 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
date of filing of the petition till realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. However, the appellants-claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 94 days in filing the appeal.
v. MFA NO.304/2015 (MVC NO.488/2013) is Allowed In Part. The appellants – claimants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.7,87,200/- (Rs.11,96,200 – Rs.4,09,000) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing. However, the appellants-claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 72 days in filing the appeal.
vi. The remaining observations and findings made by the Tribunal in the aforesaid impugned judgment and award are kept in tact.
- 33 -
MFA No. 303 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 302 of 2015 MFA No. 304 of 2015 MFA No. 305 of 2015
vii. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. viii. No order as to costs. ix. Draw award accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE
ND,JJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32