IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.6991/2016 (MV) BETWEEN 1. SMT. LAKSHMAKKA @ LAKSHMAMMA, W/O LATE MAHALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 2. BHUTESHA S/O LATE MAHALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS, 3. MAHANTHESHA S/O LATE MAHALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS, APPELLANTS 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS ARE REPTD., BY THEIR MOTHER, NATURAL GUARDIAN, APPELLANT NO.1 HEREIN 4. OBALAMMA W/O LATE LINGANNA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT BHUVANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, SIRA TALUK. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SATHEESH H K, ADV.) AND THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, DOUBLE ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560025, BUS BG. NO.KA-42-F-1334. ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. F S DABALI, ADV.) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:27.3.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.630/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, SIRA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ‘HEARING ON IA’ THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT The appeal is filed by the claimants - legal representatives of the deceased seeking enhancement of compensation as against the judgment and award dated 27.03.2015 in MVC No.630/2014 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT at Sira. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.6,70,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. The accident is of the year 2014.
2. Heard, 3. The claimants are the wife, children and mother of the deceased. The deceased succumbed to road traffic accident occurred on 03.03.2014 and he was aged about 38 years at the time of accident. The Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.6,70,000/- along with interest at 6% p.a. The appellants stated that deceased was working as an agriculturist coolie and also mason and he was earning about Rs.10,000/- p.m. The income has been disbelieved since avocation has not been proved and it is submitted that the avocation of this nature cannot be proved.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent supports the order passed by the Tribunal.
5. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties.
6. Where the income of the deceased is not assessed due to various reasons that itself is not a ground to disbelieve the income of the deceased. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in 2017 SCC online SC 1270 held as follows:
“There can be no dispute over the fact that price index, fall in bank interest, escalation of rates in many a field have to be noticed. The court cannot remain oblivious to the same”.
7. In case where the income is not proved by the claimants because of the illiteracy and inaccessible to necessary information, it is the duty of the Tribunal to go further and assess the notional income. This court consistently assessed the income on the basis of various aspects including the size of the family, place of residence and year of accident etc. So, this court takes note of price index and fall in money value, cost of living, school fees to the students and arrived at notional income. The accident is of the year 2014. The size of the family members is five. The deceased must have earned sufficient amount to feed his family and also for his personal expenses. By looking at the size of the family, the income is to be assessed at Rs.10,000/- p.m.
8. Taking into consideration the above aspects, the income of the deceased to be arrived at Rs.10,000/- per month. Accordingly, Rs.10,000/- is taken and the minor children who are aged about 4 and 9 have to be taken to school and provide schooling and a widow may not be in a position to take care of their educational expenses. Under these circumstances, this appeal is to be allowed by taking the income at Rs.10,000/- p.m. Accordingly, the calculation is 10,000/- x 12 x ¾ x 15 =Rs.13,50,000/- the same is awarded under the loss of dependency and Rs.70,000/- under other conventional head is awarded. Further, the death resulting in deprival of education to the said two small children and for their educational purposes only, an additional Rs.2,00,000/- each is awarded. In total Rs.4,00,000/- is awarded for two kids towards their education. The total comes to Rs.18,20,000/- which shall carry interest. Out of which, Rs.5,00,000/- each with accrued interest is to be deposited in the name of the minor children till they attain majority with a provision only to receive interest to meet the educational expenses and the concerned bank is directed to credit the said amount directly to the school/college after having satisfied about their requirement for educational expenses only. Balance amount with accrued interest shall be released in favour of appellant No.1 and 4 equally.
9. In case for any reason, the minors are not prosecuting or dropped out from the school/college, then the amount in deposit in bank will have to be refunded to the respondent-corporation. Further, the concerned bank is required to examine the requirement of educational expenses for the said purpose. The bank may contact the school of the children to ensure that if they are studying and have any claim made on behalf of the student and in that event the said amount is to be transferred to the school or a college where they study.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part.
CT-HR Chs* Sd/- JUDGE