IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR M.F.A.NO.527 OF 2017(MV-D) BETWEEN 1. SMT B R KALPANA JADAV W/O LATE SHANKAR RAO JADAV AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 2. SANTOSH RAO JADAV S S/O LATE SHANKAR RAO JADAV AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS BOTH ARE R/AT NO.E-291/5 3RD CROSS, APC LAYOUT THINDLU BANGALORE 560097 ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI GURUDEVA PRASAD K T, ADVOCATE) AND 1. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., PRESTIGE CORNICHE NO.62/1, 2ND FLOOR RICHMOND ROAD BANGALORE 560 025. BY ITS MANAGER 2. MR JAYARAM K MAJOR, S/O KEMPANNA GOWDA R/AT NO.NA-735 BEL COLONY NEAR NAGALAND CIRCLE JALAHALLI BANGALORE 560 013. ….RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI HARSHA P.BANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 03.08.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.2762/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 03.08.2016 passed by the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC.No.2762/2015 whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.58,07,000/- together with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of claim petition till realization on account of death of Sri. Shankar Rao Jadav who died in the road fatal accident that occurred on 17.06.2015.
2. Though the matter is listed for Admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
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 is not in dispute and this appeal is restricted to quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
4. The only ground on which the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants has assailed the impugned judgment and award is that at para Nos. 31 and 32 of the judgment, the Tribunal committed error in deducting a sum of Rs.39,108/- towards tax from the true income of Rs.7,14,846/- since the deceased was working in Bharath Electronics Limited, Bengaluru and it is permanent job. It is contended that the Tribunal having deducted a sum of Rs.17,349/- under the Income Tax Act, as held in para No.31 of the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal committed an error in once again deducting the said amount and thereby coming to the conclusion that a total sum of Rs.39,108/- was liable to be deducted towards tax out of the true income of Rs.7,41,846/-. It is therefore contended by the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants that they accordingly would be entitled to additional enhanced compensation towards ‘loss of dependency’.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent-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-claimants, a perusal of para Nos. 31 and 32 of the impugned judgment and award would clearly indicate that the Tribunal has deducted a sum of Rs.17,849/- out of true income of Rs.7,14,846/- having already deducted the said amount from out of the income of the deceased who was working in permanent job at Bharath Electronics Limited, Bengaluru. The Tribunal clearly committed an error in once again deducting additional sum of Rs.17,849/- and this has resulted in erroneous conclusion while assessing/quantifying ‘loss of dependency’.
8. In the circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the appellants-claimants are entitled to additional compensation in a sum of Rs.1,43,366/- together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till realization as hereunder:
(a) The additional income of the deceased which has been wrongly deducted by the Tribunal should be taken as Rs.17,000/-.
(b) 15% to be added towards future prospects comes to Rs.2,550/-.
(c) Adding both comes to Rs.19,550/-
(d) Deducting one-third from the said amount comes to Rs.1,3033/-. Accordingly, the appellant-claimant would be entitled to Rs.1,43,366/-. (13,033x12x11) 9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following:-
ORDER (i) The appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 03.08.2016 passed by the III Addl. Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC.No.2762/2015 is hereby modified.
(iii) The appellants-claimants are entitled to additional compensation of Rs.1,43,366/- which shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till realization.
(iv) The apportionment and disbursement to be done as per the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
Sd/- JUDGE SSD