IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR M.F.A.NO.4271 OF 2018 (MV - D) BETWEEN 1. ASHIFAKHANAM, W/O MOHAMMED THAHIR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, 2. MOHAMMED TAHIR, S/O MOHAMMED ANWAR, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF NO.2361, 7TH CROSS, K.R.MOHALLA, MYSURU.
NOW R/AT SYED AHAMMED, BABURAYANAKOPPALU, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 134.
(BY SRI. HARSHA S.P., ADVOCATE) AND 1. GANGADHARA, S/O BAIRAJU, MAJOR, R/AT NO.72, NARAGONAHALLI VILLAGE, K.R.PETE TALUK, MANDYA – 571 426.
…APPELLANTS 2. THE MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.46, WHITES ROAD, ROYAPETTAM, CHENNAI – 600 014, TAMILNADU.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.RAVI S SAMPRATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:13.12.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.236/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, SRIRANGAPATNA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the claimants being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award dated 13.12.2017 passed by the learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, MACT, Srirangapatna (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in M.V.C.No.236/2017.
2. The claim petition has been filed by the parents of the deceased child Shara, who was aged about 3 years as on the date of the accident, which resulted in her death.
3. Though the matter is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.
4. 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 are not in dispute and this appeal is restricted to quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
5. The learned counsel for the appellants submit that the Tribunal committed an error in coming to the conclusion that since the deceased child was only three years old as on the date of the accident, the notional income should be taken as Rs.15,000/- p.a. as per the Second Schedule to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, since the child was admittedly a non earning person. In this context, the learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal & another vs. Lala & Others (2014) 1 SCC 244, to contend that since the Second Schedule to the Act, 1988 having been incorporated in the 1994, the notional income of the deceased minor child to be taken as Rs.30,000/- p.a. in the light of the increase in cost of living as well as the galloping rate of inflation which would justify taking of the notional income as Rs.30,000/- p.a. instead of Rs.15,000/- p.a. It is therefore contended that on this ground, the appellants- claimants would be entitled to additional enhanced compensation under the head ‘loss of dependency’.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.1-Insurance company would support the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
8. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellants, in view of the undisputed fact that the accident occurred in the year 2017 coupled with the fact that a sum of Rs.15,000/- p.a. was incorporated in the Second Schedule to the Act 1988 in the year 1994, in view of the substantial increase in the cost of living and having regard to the galloping rate of inflation, it would be just and proper to take the notional income of the deceased child as Rs.30,000/- p.a. as held by the Apex Court in Kishan Gopal’s case (supra).
9. Thus, taking the notional income of the deceased child as Rs.30,000/- p.a., the appellants- claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.4,50,000/- under the head ‘loss of dependency’. The Tribunal has already awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- under conventional heads. Thus, the appellants would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. Since the Tribunal has already awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, the appellants-claimants would be entitled to an additional enhanced compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following:
ORDER (i) The appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, MACT, Srirangapatna in MVC No.236/2017 is hereby modified.
(iii) The appellants-claimants are entitled to additional enhanced compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- which shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
(iv) The apportionment and disbursement to be done as per the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
Sd/- JUDGE SSD