IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD M.F.A.No.10814 OF 2012(MV) BETWEEN:
1. Smt.Gangamma W/o Late. Laxmana Aged about 48 years 2. Chandra @ Chandrashekhara S/o Late.Laxmana Aged about 28 years 3. Manjunatha S/o Late. Laxmana Aged about 26 years 4. Radha D/o Late. Laxmana Aged about 24 years 5. Annappa S/o Late. Laxmana Aged about 23 years 6. Savitha D/o Late. Laxmana Aged about 21 years All are residing at Hosapete Thogarihankal Post Chikmagalur Taluk & Dist-577101. … Appellants (By Sri.K.N.Mohan, Advocate) AND:
1. Sri.Krishna S/o Vasantha Aged about 48 years R/o Hosapete Village, Thogarihankal Post Chikmagalur Taluk & District Pin-577101.
2. The Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Officer P.B.No.114, Crescent Court Chikmagalur-577101.
3. Mustaq Ahmed S/o Buden Sab Aged about 49 years C/o Akku Ahamed @ Akmal S/o Basheer Ahmed, R/o Ramanahalli Chikmagalur-577101.
4. Sri.Akku Ahamed @ Akmal S/o Basheer Ahmed Aged about 35 years R/o Ramanahalli Chikmagalur-577101.
5. The Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd, Yashoram Chambers R.G.Road, Chikmagalur-577101.
6. Mr.Ravi Hansaraj Patel S/o H.K.Patel M/s Shankar Saw Mill, K.M.Road, Jyothinagar, Chickmagalur-577101. ... Respondents (By Sri.A.Kumarvel, Advocate, For R1: Sri. P.B.Raju, Advocate, For R2: M/s.Sri.Shetty & Hegde Associates, Advocates for R3 & R4: Sri.B.A.Ramakrishna, Advocate for R5: Notice to R6 is served.) This MFA is filed under 173(1) of MV Act, against the Judgment and Award dated:13.04.2012 passed in MVC No.457/2009 on the file of the Principal District Judge, MACT, Chikmagalur, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.
This MFA coming on for admission, this day, this Court, delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is filed by the claimants, who are the wife and children of the deceased, challenging the judgment and award dated 13.04.2012 passed by the Principal District Judge & MACT, Chikmagalur in MVC No.457/2009, whereby the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.5,08,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 12.07.2009, at about 7.00 p.m. deceased Laxmana had gone for coolie work as a loader and unloader in Alfa Goods auto bearing No.KA- 18/9250. When the auto was returning, deceased was also sitting by the side of the driver and silver oak plants were loaded in the vehicle. The driver of the said auto drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and when it came near Hebballi on Chikmgalur-Tarikere road, it dashed to the lorry bearing No.KA- 18/7685 which was parked in the middle of the road without any parking light or signal. Due to the said accident, deceased sustained grievous injuries to his head and other parts of the body. Immediately, he was shifted to M.G.Hospital, Chickmagalur and he succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. Afterwards the claimants have filed the claim petition before the MACT, Chikmagalur in MVC No.457/2009.
3. To establish their case, the son of the deceased was examined as PW1 and got marked 6 documents. On the other hand, an officer of the Insurance Company was examined as RW1 and got marked 7 documents. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal granted a compensation of Rs.5,08,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation, claimants have filed this appeal.
4. Sri K.N.Mohan, learned counsel for the appellants submits that as on the date of the accident the deceased was aged about 50 years and was earning about Rs.6,000/- per month. But the Tribunal has erred in taking the notional income at Rs.4,500/- per month.
5. He further contended that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, the Tribunal has not considered the loss of future prospects.
6. Lastly, he contended that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in PRANAY SETHI (supra), a sum of Rs.70,000/- has to be awarded under the conventional heads. But the Tribunal has awarded a lesser compensation on the conventional heads. On these grounds, he sought for enhancement of compensation.
7. Per contra, Sri B.A.Ramakrishna, learned counsel for the respondent – Insurance Company submits that even though claimants have claimed that deceased was earning Rs.6,000/-
per month, but they have not produced any documents to establish the income. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly taken the notional income at Rs.4,500/- per month.
8. He further submits that since the legal representatives are majors, they are not depending upon the deceased. The Tribunal rightly granted the compensation under the conventional heads. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.
9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
10. It is not in dispute that deceased Laxmana died due to the accident that occurred on 12.07.2009. As on the date of the accident he was aged about 50 years. Even though the claimants have claimed that deceased was earning Rs.6,000/- per month, they have not produced any documents to establish the same. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal was left with no other option but to calculate the income of the deceased on notional basis. While calculating the notional income the Tribunal has taken Rs.4,500/- per month, which is on the lower side. In catena of decisions this Court has considered the chart prepared by the Lokadalath for the purpose of deciding the cases. As per the chart, for the accident of the year 2009 notional income of Rs.5,000/- is fixed. In view of PRANAY SETHI’s case (supra), for the age-group of 40 to 50, 10% has to be added as future prospects. Accordingly, loss of dependency is recalculated as under:
Monthly income - 5,000/-
Add: 10% towards future prospects - 500/-
Total - 5,500/-
Less: 1/3 towards personal expenses - 1,833/-
Actual income - 3,667/-
Multiplier - 13 Loss of dependency 3,667 x 12 x 13 - 5,72,052/-
11. In respect of conventional heads, the Tribunal awarded Rs.5,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses. No compensation is awarded towards loss of estate. But as per PRANAY SETHI (supra), the claimants are entitled for Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate, Rs.40,000/-
towards loss of consortium and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. Totally, they are entitled for Rs.70,000/- towards the conventional heads. The compensation of Rs.25,000/- i.e., Rs.5,000/- to each of the claimants towards loss of love and affection is on the lower side. The same is enhanced to Rs.20,000/- each, i.e., Rs.1,00,000/-.
12. For the reasons stated above, the appeal filed by the claimants is hereby allowed in part. The award, dated 13.04.2012, stands modified as under:
13. *Respondent No.1 is directed to deposit 75% of the award amount with 6% interest and respondent No.5 is directed to deposit 25% of the award amount with 6% interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the * Corrected vide Court order dated: 05.07.2022 date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The amount so deposited by the Insurance Company shall be disbursed to the claimants as per the apportionment made by the Tribunal, after due verification of their identity.
Cm/-
Sd/- JUDGE