IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD M.F.A.No. 1240 OF 2012(MV) BETWEEN:
1. Smt. Maimuna Aged 33 years W/o Late. Lathief.
2. Chi. Asif Aged 16 years S/o Late. Lathief 3. Chi. Arif Aged 14 years S/o Late. Lathief 4. Chi. Ashpak Aged 12 years S/o Late. Lathief 5. Chi.Sadhik Aged 10 years S/o Late. Lathief (Appellants No.2 to 5 are minors Rep. by next friend mother Appellant No.1) 6. Sri. Koyasaka Aged 66 years S/o Late. Yusuf Beary 7. Smt. Mariamma Aged 61 years W/o Sri. Koyasaka.
All are R/at Kopparabail House Kakkinje post, Charmady Village Belthangady Taluk, D.K. … Appellants (By Sri.Ramesh.P.L., Advocate for Sri.Pundikai Ishwara Bhat, Advocate) AND:
1. Sri. M. Shafi Shafi Timbers Opp: Government School Bejai, Kapikad Mangalore, D.K 2. The New India Assurance Co, Limited Branch Office: Polymer House Nellikai Road, Hampanakatta Magalore. Rep. by its Manager. ... Respondents (By Sri. M.Narayanappa, Advocate for R2: Notice to R1 is dispensed with v/o 28.5.2013) This MFA is filed under 173(1) of MV Act, against the Judgment and Award dated: 09.06.2011 passed in MVC No.183/2006 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge & CJM, Member, MACT, Mangalore, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.
This MFA coming on for hearing, this day, the Court, delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 09.06.2011 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mangalore in MVC No.183/2006 whereby the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.5,00,800/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 29.12.2005 at about 3.00 p.m. the deceased Lathief was loading the wooden logs to the lorry bearing registration No.KA-19/A-8710. After loading the wooden logs when the deceased was getting down from the lorry the driver of the said lorry, without observing the loaders moved the lorry in reverse direction and at that time the deceased who was getting down from the lorry fell down and sustained grievous injuries on his forehead. Later he took treatment in Sahara Hospital but he succumbed to the injuries on 07.01.2006. Afterwards the wife, children and parents of the deceased have filed the claim petition before the MACT, Mangalore in MVC No.183/2006.
3. To establish their case, claimants have examined two witnesses and got marked 14 documents. On the other hand, the Insurance Company has not examined any witness but got marked 3 documents. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has granted a compensation of Rs.5,00,800/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. Being not satisfied by the quantum of compensation, claimants have filed this appeal.
4. Sri Ramesh P.L., learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal is not justified in taking the monthly income of the deceased as Rs.3,000/- even though the claimants have claimed the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month.
5. The learned counsel further contended that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMTIED vs. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, the Tribunal has not considered the loss of future prospects.
6. Lastly, he contended that as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in PRANAY SETHI (supra), a sum of Rs.70,000/- has to be awarded on the conventional heads. But the Tribunal has awarded a lesser compensation of Rs.40,000/-. On these grounds he sought for enhancement of compensation.
7. Per contra, Sri M.Narayanappa, learned counsel for the respondent – Insurance Company submits that even though the claimants have claimed that the deceased was earning Rs.6,000/- per month, they have not produced any documents to establish the same. Further, he submitted that the claimants had not taken any contention in respect of the future prospects. Therefore, the Tribunal is justified in granting the compensation. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
9. It is not in dispute that the deceased Lathief died in the accident occurred on 29.12.2005 due to the rash and negligence of the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.KA-19/A-8710. As on the date of the accident the deceased was aged about 31 years. Since the claimants have not established the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has taken notional income of Rs.3,000/-. For that, future prospects has to be added at 40%. In view of PRANAY SETHI’s case (supra), for the age-group of below 40 years, 40% has to be added as future prospects. Accordingly, loss of dependency is recalculated as under:
10. In respect of conventional heads, as per PRANAY SETHI (supra), the claimant/appellants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.70,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- under the head ‘loss of estate’, Rs.10,000/- under the head ‘loss of consortium’ and Rs.10,000/- under the head ‘funeral expenses, the same has to be enhanced to Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.15,000/-, respectively.
11. For the reasons stated above, the appeal filed by the claimants is hereby allowed in part. The award, dated 09.06.2011, stands modified as under:
12. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition, till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The amount so deposited by the Insurance Company shall be disbursed to the claimants as per the apportionment made by the Tribunal, after due verification of their identity.
Sd/- JUDGE Cm/-