IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.5142/2015 (MV) BETWEEN:
1. SMT.KAMALA @ KAMALAMMA W/O NATARAJU @ NATARAJAN, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS 2. SRI PERIYASWAMY S/O NATARAJU @ NATARAJAN, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS 3. SRI PRABHAKARAN S/O NATARAJU @ NATARAJAN, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS 4. SRI RAJA PERIYANNAN @ RAJU S/O PERIYANNAN AGED ABOUT 86 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.737, DUMMASANDRA, SARJAPUR CIRCLE, HULIMAVU, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE – 560 076 ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI.GURUDEV PRASAD K T, ADV.) AND:
1. VENKATESH M S/O MUNIYAPPA, MUTHUSANDRA (V & P) HOSKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE – 560 096 2. THE MANAGER IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.41, 2ND FLOOR, CRISTU COMPLEX, NEAR MANDOVI MOTORS, LAVELLE ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M V SRIDHAR CHAKRAVARTHI, ADV. FOR R1; SRI.B.PRADEEP , ADV. FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:01.04.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.2916/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE 9TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, 34TH ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
J U D G M E N T Accident is of the year 2014. Claimants are the wife, children and father of the deceased. The learned counsel for the claimants submits that prior to accident the deceased was hale and healthy and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month by doing fish business. The Tribunal has disbelieved the same and has assessed the income at Rs.6,000/- per month. Hence, he submits that the compensation may be suitably enhanced considering the income of the deceased as claimed in the claim petition.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and gone through the judgment and award of the Tribunal. The Claimants have claimed that the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month by doing fish business, but they have not produced any proof in support of the claim. In the absence of proving the income with relevant documents or materials, the courts have to assess the notional income considering the aspects like place of residence, occupation, number of dependents, cost of living, price index, as also the year of accident. In the present case, the year of accident is 2014. Considering the number of dependents and also the age of the children, it is to be presumed that the deceased should have earned a decent income for feeding the family as also the aged father. Hence, the income of the deceased is to be assessed at Rs.9,000/- per month. Accordingly, the calculation would be Rs.9,000/- x ¾ x 12 x 14 which comes to Rs.11,34,000/-. The same is awarded under the head loss of dependency as against Rs.6,72,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The compensation awarded under the other heads remain undisturbed. The enhanced amount carries interest at the rate as is awarded by the Tribunal. Apportionment is as per the award of the Tribunal.
Appeal is partly allowed.
lnn Sd/- JUDGE