IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. L. NARAYANA SWAMY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MFA NO.2398 OF 2012 (MV) BETWEEN:
G. SAVITHA W/O LATE B.L. UMESH AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS C/O G. GIRIYAPPA RAJENDRA NAGARA CHITRADURGA.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI HARISH KUMAR L., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR V.R.L. LOGISTICS LIMITED BANGALORE ROAD VARUVU HUBLI.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
P.J. EXTENSION AKKAMAHADEVI ROAD DAVANAGERE.
3. PUTTAMMA W/O LATE LINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS RESIDING AT BEJJIHALLI VILLAGE HULEKUNTE POST SIRA TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI P.B. RAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 SRI JAIKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 NOTICE TO R-1 D/W V/C/O DTD:05.03.2012) ---
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.01.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.828/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT-VI, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT, APPORTIONMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal is filed seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. The wife of the deceased made a claim petition for the RTA which took place on 08.09.2010 for the death of her husband and has relied on Ex.P-11 – Salary Certificate, wherein it is referred that the deceased was earning Rs.12,000/- p.m. Same has been disbelieved by the Tribunal, since the wife of the deceased in her evidence has deposed that deceased was working in Balaji Garments Private Limited whereas the Salary Certificate is issued by Balaji Finishing House.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the wife is not in a position to make clear where exactly the deceased was working though she has produced Ex.P-11. He submits that under these circumstances, by considering the age of the deceased, it would be appropriate to take the income at Rs.12,000/- .
4. Learned counsel for the respondents supports the order of the Tribunal and prays to dismiss the appeal. He also submitted that Ex.P-11 has not been proved and no one has been examined.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the pleadings.
6. The only ground canvassed by the appellant is by relying on Ex.P-11 – Salary certificate. The Tribunal has assigned reasons by disbelieving the evidence of PW.1 and also Ex.P-11 and has assessed the notional income at Rs.3,000/- which is on the lower side.
7. The deceased was the resident of Chitradurga District Head Quarters. Since he was aged about 32 years at the time of death, it would be appropriate to assess the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/-. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS ([2017]16 SCC 680) has held that if the age of the deceased is below 40 years, an addition of 40% of the income should be taken for calculating the future prospects. If the same is applied to this case, it would be Rs.2,400/- (6000x40%) and if Rs.2,400/- is added to Rs.6,000/-, the monthly income would be Rs.8,400/- and if 1/3rd is deducted towards personal expenses, the income would be Rs.5,600/-. Hence, loss of dependency works out to Rs.10,75,200/- (5600x12x16). The compensation awarded towards medical expenses remains undisturbed. The amounts awarded under the other conventional heads is enhanced by another Rs.45,000/-.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award of the Tribunal stands modified. The claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.11,60,200/- which shall carry interest @ 6% p.a.
Apportionment of the award amount and direction regarding deposit shall be made as per award of the Tribunal.
The amount in deposit, if any, is directed to be transferred to the MACT.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ca