IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NOS.1648/2016 C/W 1649/2016 (MV) BETWEEN:
BASAVARAJ H H S/O HANUMANTHAPPA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS PERMANENT RESIDENT OF HARITHIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE BIRUR POST, KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT PRESENTLY R/O 3RD CROSS ROAD AMBEDKAR NAGARA, HASSAN PIN CODE-573201 ...APPELLANT IN MFA NO.1648/2016 (BY SMT. KAVITHA H.C., ADVOCATE) BETWEEN:
CHANDRA S/O KUKARA AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS R/O 3RD CROSS ROAD AMBEDKAR NAGARA HASSAN PIN CODE-573 201 ... APPELLANT IN MFA NO.1649/2016 (BY SMT. KAVITHA H.C., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. HASENABBA J.S.
S/O SULEMAN, MAJOR R/O KUDUGARAHALLI VILLAGE HALASULIGE POST SAKALESHPURA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201 2. THE MANAGER UNIVERSAL SAMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. CRISTAL PLAZA, OPP. IN FINITY MAL E-8 LINK ROAD, ANDERI (WEST) MUMBAI-400058 … RESPONDENTS (COMMON) (BY SRI RAVI S SAMPRATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THESE APPEALS ARE FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.01.2016 PASSED IN MVC NOS.251/2012 & 252/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT I, HASSAN, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITIONS FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T 1. These appeals are by the claimants seeking for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. By the impugned judgment, the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.1,99,930/- to the appellant/claimant in M.V.C.No.251/2012 and Rs.1,92,110/- to the appellant/claimant in M.V.C.No.252/2012 for the injuries suffered by them in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 11.01.2012.
2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the impugned judgment.
3. It is contended that the Tribunal had erred in assessing the notional income of the appellants at Rs.5,500/- per month. The Tribunal has assessed the permanent disability suffered by the claimants at 8%. Accordingly, it has awarded a sum of Rs.84,480/- and Rs.89,760/- to the claimants under the head of ‘loss of future earning’. However, it is contended that in respect of the accident and claims arising in 2012, the notional income adopted by the Lok Adalat is Rs.7,000/- to Rs.8,000/-. It is further contended that the functional disability of the appellants has considerably reduced. On a query by this Court as to whether the appellants have placed any material to demonstrate the functional disability, the same is answered in the negative.
4. It is not the case of the appellants that the disability is of such a nature that it has incapacitated them from continuing the livelihood by doing coolie work. It is also not the case of the appellants that the fractures are mal united or have led to other complications resulting in reduction of ability to continue to eek out their livelihood as Coolies. In that view of the matter, the disability of 8% as assessed by the Tribunal, appears to be marginal and it would not greatly reduce the ability of the appellants to continue eking out their livelihood as Coolies.
5. In view of the above, the short point that arises for determination in this appeal is as to whether the Tribunal was right in adopting the notional income of the appellants at Rs.5,500/- per month?
6. As far as the claimant in M.V.C.No.251/2012 is concerned, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant, the general practice adopted by this Court and the Tribunals is that, in the absence of any evidence pertaining to the income earned by the claimant, the notional income adopted by the Lok Adalat would be applied. Hence, in the instant case also, the notional income of the claimant requires to be reworked and fixed at Rs.7,500/- per month. In that view of the matter, the notional income of the appellant is fixed at Rs.7,500/- per month. The Tribunal has assessed the permanent disability suffered by the appellant at 8%. By adopting the multiplier of 16, the loss of future earning would come to Rs.1,15,200/- (Rs.7,500/- X 12 X 16 X 8/100). Hence, the appellant is entitled for an additional amount of Rs.30,720/- under the said head.
7. As far as the claimant in M.V.C.No.252/2012 is concerned, as noted supra, as a practice, the Courts have been adopting the notional income applied during Lok Adalat as a barometer for fixing the notional income in the event of there being no proof of the income of the claimant or the deceased. Admittedly, in case of accident claims arising in 2012, the notional income applied during Lok Adalat is Rs.7,000/- to Rs.8,000/-. In that view of the matter, the notional income of the appellant is fixed at Rs.7,000/- per month. The Tribunal has assessed the permanent disability suffered by the appellant at 8%. By adopting the multiplier of 17, the loss of future earning would come to Rs.1,14,240/- (Rs.7,000/- X 12 X 17 X 8/100). Hence, the appellant is entitled for an additional amount of Rs.24,480/- under the said head.
8. In my opinion, the compensation awarded under the other heads does not call for any interference.
9. In the result, the appeals are partly allowed. The appellant/claimant in MVC No.251/2012 is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.30,720/- along with interest thereon at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. The appellant/claimant in MVC No.252/2012 is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.24,480/- along with interest thereon at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. Respondent no.2-Insurance Company shall deposit the aforesaid enhanced amount within six weeks.
Office to draw up decrees accordingly.
hkh.
Sd/- JUDGE