IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR M.F.A.NO.4310 OF 2017{MV) BETWEEN 1. KARIYA MOOLYA AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS S/O LATE MENPA MOOLYA.
2. GIRIJA MOOLYA AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS W/O KARIYA MOOLYA.
3. NAGARATHNA MOOLYA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS FIRST WIFE OF SADANANDA MOOLYA.
4. NITHIN KUMAR AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS S/O LATE SADANANDA MOOLYA.
5. SACHIN KUMAR AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS S/O LATE SADANANDA MOOLYA.
6. MASTER NAGAVENDRA AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS S/O LATE SADANANDA MOOLYA REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN NAGARATHNA MOOLYA.
7. JYOTHI MOOLYA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS SECOND WIFE OF LATE SADANANDA MOOLYA.
8. MASTER SRUJAN AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS S/O LATE SADANANDA MOOLYA REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN JYOTHI MOOLYA.
ALL ARE RESIDING AT KATILESHWARI HOUSE PATHONJIKATTE GUNDYA KOODURASTHE, PERVAJE KARKALA KASABA, VILLAGE KARKALA TALUK - 571 104.
.APPELLANTS (BY SRI.H.PAVANCHANDRA SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND 1. RAVISHANKAR SHERIGAR AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS S/O GOPALA SHERIGAR R/AT LALITH MAHAL MALA BAJAGOLI KARKALA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT - 574 104.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., UDUPI DIVISIONAL OFFICE UDUPI - 576 101.
.RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 NOTICE TO R-1 IS D/W) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 04.11.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO. 747/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, KARKALA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal filed by the claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 04.11.2016 passed by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Karkala in MVC No.747/2015, whereby the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.15,26,100/- together with interest at the rate of 8% p.a., from the date of the claim petition till realization on account of the death of Sadananda Moolya in a fatal road accident that occurred on 28.03.2015.
2. Though the matter is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.
3. 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.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal committed an error in taking the income of the deceased as Rs.10,000/- p.m. In this context, learned counsel submits that the deceased was doing flower business and earning substantial income which stood proved by the unimpeached documents Exs.P.12 to P.14, i.e., the income tax returns for the years 2012 to 2015 which would to go show that the deceased had an income of about Rs.23,000/- p.m. It is therefore contended that in the absence of any rebuttal evidence adduced by the respondents to impeach the said evidence adduced by the appellants with regard to the income of the deceased, the Tribunal committed an error in taking the income only as Rs.10,000/- and not as per the income reflected in the income tax returns.
5. Learned counsel would also contend that having regard to the fact that eight dependents were left behind by the deceased, the compensation awarded under conventional heads is also meager and insufficient and requires enhancement.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2-Insurance company has supported the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal.
7. I have given my careful consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
8. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellants in the face of the unimpeached documents at Exs.P.12 to 14, i.e., income tax returns for the years 2012 to 2015 which would clearly establish that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs.23,000/- p.m., the Tribunal committed an error in coming to the conclusion that the income has to be taken at a nominal rate of Rs.10,000/- p.m. The Tribunal committed an error in holding that there was no evidence touching the actual income of the deceased without considering or appreciating the aforesaid documents at Exs.P.12 to P.14 produced by the appellant. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that as established by the evidence adduced by the appellants, the income for the purpose of assessing loss of dependency is to be taken as Rs.23,000/- p.m. It is also contended that as per law laid down by the Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited V. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157, adding 30% of income to the said amount, income comes to Rs.29,900/- (Rs.23,000/- + Rs.6,900/-). Deducting 1/4th of the income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, the income has to be taken as Rs.23,920/-. Thus, compensation payable under the head loss of dependency comes to * Rs.37,67,400/- (*Rs.22,425/- x 12 x 14) as against Rs.14,56,056/-. Thus, appellant is entitled * Corrected vide Court order dated: 28.01.2021.
to additional sum of * Rs.23,11,344/- under the head loss of dependency.
9. Having regard to the material on record coupled with the fact that the deceased was a sole bread earner of the family comprising of eight dependents, I am of the opinion that an additional sum of Rs.75,000/- has to be awarded as global compensation towards conventional heads, which shall not carry any interest in addition to the amounts already awarded under the conventional heads.
10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following order:-
(i) The appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 04.11.2016 passed by the Tribunal is hereby modified.
(iii) The appellants-claimants are entitled to additional enhanced compensation of *Rs.23,11,344/- which shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realization and an additional sum of Rs.75,000/- is awarded as additional global compensation * Corrected vide Court order dated: 28.01.2021.
towards conventional heads, which shall not carry any interest.
(iv) The apportionment and disbursement to be done as per the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
Sd/- JUDGE bnv