IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM M.F.A.NO.452/2016(MV-D) BETWEEN 1. SMT. GEETHA W/O LATE V LAKSHMANNA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 2. L. ARPITHA D/O LATE V LAKSHMANNA AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS 3. MASTER L RAVICHANDRA S/O LATE V LAKSHMANNA AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS PARTIES AT SERIAL NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER SMT.GEETHA ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.435, RAJAJINAGAR, “ASHRAYA YOJANE MANE” NEAR RING ROAD BOGADI, BOGADI 2ND STAGE MYSORE -570 026 ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI H V BHANU PRAKASH, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SRI KUMAR R S/O RAJU AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.24 YERIYUR POST YELANDUR TALUK CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT – 571 441 2. SRI PUTTANANJASHETTY S/O LATE MARAKANA SHETTY RESIDING AT NO.108 THAGADURU VILLAGE AND POST NANJANGUD TALUK MYSORE DISTRICT- 571 301 3 . ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., HEAD OFFICE AT:NO.46 SHITES ROAD, CHENNAI REP BY ITS MANAGER PIN CODE ; 600020 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAVI SHANKAR C R, ADVOCATE FOR R3, R1 & R2 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT ABD AWARD DATED 30.01.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.274/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE 2ND ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MACT, MYSORE PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, SATYANARAYANA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Claimants in MVC.No.274/2013 on the file of MACT, Mysuru, have come up in this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. Admitted facts are that, the husband of 1st appellant – Lakshmana, who is father of appellants 2 and 3 died in a road traffic accident on 5.12.2012. The said accident was caused at about 8.45 pm., on that day by the Tata Ace Goods vehicle bearing registration No.KA-09/B- 5543. At the relevant time of accident, the deceased was riding his motor cycle bearing registration No.KA- 09/ED.7480. The accident is not in dispute. So also death of Lakshmana in the said accident. Thereafter, claim petition was filed by his widow and children seeking compensation for his death, where they contended that deceased was employed as a Peon in Vanivilasa Water Services with monthly salary of Rs.16,660/- and at the time of accident, he was aged about 43 years.
3. In the claim proceedings, the Tribunal on appreciation of the material on record took the income of the deceased as stated in the claim petition, to that another 30% is added towards future prospects thereafter, deducted 1/3rd towards personal upkeep of the deceased, took remaining 2/3rd as loss of dependency to the claimants and accordingly, calculated the compensation payable to the claimants in a sum of Rs.24,26,456/- under the head loss of dependency. In addition, the Tribunal has also awarded compensation in a sum of Rs.1,90,000/- under conventional heads. Being not satisfied with the same, the claimants have come up in this appeal.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, it is seen that admittedly, the amount awarded under conventional heads by the Tribunal is in excess of the normal practice of awarding Rs.70,000/- in lump sum. In that view of the matter, this Court find that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal itself is in excess of Rs.1,20,000/- over and above of what the claimants are entitled. Hence, question of considering this appeal for enhancement does not arise. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
5. In view of the dismissal of appeal, LCR is ordered to be sent back to the Tribunal for disbursement of compensation amount which is deposited by the insurer pursuant to the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE nd/-