IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT MFA No.7891 OF 2018 (MV) BETWEEN 1. SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O. LATE SHANKARMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 2. KUM. LEELAVATHI D/O. LATE SHANKARMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, 3. ANIL KUMAR S/O. LATE SHANKARMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, AT PRESENT ALL ARE RESIDENT OF GUDDANERALAKER VILLAGE, HOSADURGA TALUK-577 527, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. ... APPELLANTS (BY SMT. VIJAYA M.N, ADVOCATE) AND 1. LOKESHWARAIAH S/O. JAYADEVAIAH, MAJOR, OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING REG NO. KA-16-M-7208, R/O. GUDDANERALAKER VILLAGE, HOSADURGA TALUK-577 527, CHITRADURGA TOWN.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, CHITRADURGA-577 597. ... RESPONDENTS THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:11.07.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1198/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, HOSADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT This appeal by the claimants challenges the judgment & award dated 11.07.2018 made by MACT, Hosadurga, allowing M.V.C.No.1198/2017 whereby, a compensation of Rs.5,77,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, subject to a usual condition of bank deposit, has been awarded.
2. In a vehicular accident that happened on 7.5.2017, because of rash and negligent driving of the vehicle bearing No.KA-16-M-7208, one Mr.Shankara Murthy having sustained fatal injuries, succumbed thereto; his widow and children had filed a claim petition in M.V.C No.1198/2017 which was resisted by the respondents herein by filing the Written Statement.
3. From the side of the claimants, the 1st appellant being the widow of the deceased was examined as PW.1 and Smt.Mahanthamma the claimant in connected M.V.C.No.16/2018 was examined as PW.2; in their evidence, 19 documents came to be marked as per exhibits P.1 to P.19 which included the police papers, post mortem report, medical records and the charge sheet; though none was examined from the side of the respondents, the insurance policy was got marked as per exhibit R.1.
4. The MACT after considering the pleadings of the parties and after adverting to the evidentiary material, has entered the impugned judgment & award, which the claimants complain, is on the meager side.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants and having perused the Appeal Papers, this court declines to interfere in the matter for the following reasons:
(i) No material is produced to show that the deceased was running the Hotel business when law requires that such a business cannot be run without licence; no explanation is offered by the claimants’ side in this regard; therefore, this business cannot be a relevant factor at all;
(ii) no material is produced to show that the deceased was an agriculturist and he had an income from that occupation; not even a Record of Rights or the like was produced in the MACT nor placed on record here too; therefore, nothing turns out from this argument either;
(iii) the last contention that the Lok Adalat Notional Income Chart for the accident year 2017 prescribes Rs.9,000/- p.m, whereas the MACT has taken Rs.7,000/- as a base factor too does not avail since this Income Chart cannot be treated as Euclids Theorem admitting any variation; the chart is primarily for the city area where the consumer index is bit different from the one in other areas; and (iv) the MACT being statutory body having the advantage of accumulated wisdom, has awarded the compensation which cannot be faltered.
In the above circumstances, the appeal being devoid of merits, stands rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE KTY