IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3952 OF 2015 [MV] BETWEEN 1. SMT. MAJAN BEE, W/O. LATE HYDER KHAN, NOW AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 2. PRAVEEN TAJ, W/O. CHAND PASHA, NOW AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, 3. JAHINA BEE, W/O. FIRAZ KHAN, NOW AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 4. THAHERA, W/O. ANWAR PASHA, NOW AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT ARABOMMANAHALLI, THYAMAGONDLU HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DIST-562 126. ... APPELLANTS [BY SRI.RANGEGOWDA N.R., ADVOCATE] AND 1. ANAND RAMAN, MAJOR, S/O. GOPALACHARY RAMAN, R/AT C-11, NEHA APARTMENT, SAI BABA NAGAR, NGR TULING, NALLA SOPARA EAST, THANE, MAHARSHTRA-401 203.
2. THE MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, NO.132, BALAJI SOVEREIGN, 2ND FLOOR, BRIGADE ROAD, NEAR BRIGDE TOWER, BANGALORE-560 025. ... RESPONDENTS [BY SRI.RAVI S. SAMPRATI, ADVOCATE FOR R2.
R1 - NOTICE DISPENSED WITH VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 10.04.2018] * * * THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.02.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.1552/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, XXVIII ACMM. AND MACT, BENGALURU, 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 Though this appeal is listed for admission, the same is taken up for final disposal at the consent of both the learned counsel.
2. The claimants have filed this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in MVC No.1552/2012 on the file of the MACT., Bengaluru, wherein a total compensation of Rs.4,61,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. has been awarded to the appellants/claimants for the death of one Hyder Khan in a road traffic accident.
3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/Insurance Company.
4. The brief facts of the case are that;
On 28.12.2011 at about 2.00 p.m. when the deceased was waiting to cross the road on N.H.4, Tumkuru-Bengaluru Highway, near Kuluvaanahalli Bus Stand, Thyamagondlu Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk, Bengaluru Rural District, at that time, a skoda car bearing reg. No.MH-04/EH-9036 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the deceased. Due to the said impact, the deceased fell down and sustained severe head injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot.
The claimants are the wife and 3 daughters of the deceased. It is the case of the claimants that the deceased was aged 54 years and he was earning a sum of Rs.8,000/-
p.m. by working as a coolie and also as an agriculturist. A total compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- was sought before the Tribunal.
The Tribunal after considering the evidence and material on record awarded a total compensation of Rs.4,61,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till deposit. The Tribunal has taken the notional income of the deceased at Rs.5,000/- p.m. and after adopting ‘11’ as the multiplier which is applicable to the age of the deceased and adding 15% of the total income towards future prospects, awarded a sum of Rs.3,79,500/- towards loss of dependency. Further, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.82,000/- under other heads viz., loss to the estate, loss of love and affection, loss of consortium and funeral expenses.
5. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the deceased was having an income of Rs.8,000/- p.m. and therefore, the notional income taken at Rs.5,000/- p.m. by the Tribunal is not proper. Except the oral testimony of the wife of the deceased, there is no other convincing evidence on record establishing the income of the deceased. However, considering that the accident is of the year 2011 and also considering the avocation of the deceased, the notional income of the deceased is taken at Rs.6,500/- p.m. as against Rs.5,000/- p.m. taken by the Tribunal. To the said sum, an addition of 10% has to be made since the deceased was aged about 54 years as per the post-mortem report. The appropriate multiplier is ‘11’.
6. Claimant No.1 is the wife and claimant Nos.2 to 4 are the married daughters of the deceased. The Tribunal has observed that P.W.1 has admitted in her cross-examination that claimant Nos.2 to 4 are married. Though it is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that claimant No.3 was residing with the deceased since her husband deserted her, however, no material has been placed to establish the same. Therefore, the finding recorded by the Tribunal that claimant Nos.2 to 4 are not dependent on the deceased and only claimant No.1 i.e., wife of the deceased was dependent on the deceased is proper. Therefore, from the total income of the deceased 50% has to be deducted towards his personal expenses. Hence, the appellants are entitled for a compensation of Rs.4,71,900/- [Rs.6,500 + 650 = Rs.7,150 x 50% = Rs.3,575 x 12 x 11] towards loss of dependency as against Rs.3,79,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. A sum of Rs.70,000/- is awarded towards loss to the estate, loss of consortium, funeral and transportation expenses. In the facts and circumstances of the case, a sum of Rs.20,000/- each is awarded towards loss of love and affection to claimant Nos.2 to 4 i.e., daughters of the deceased. The appellants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.6,01,900/- rounded off to Rs.6,02,000/- as against Rs.4,61,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER The appeal is allowed in part. The Judgment and Award dated 28.02.2015 passed by the II Additional Small Causes Judge and XXVIII ACMM., MACT., Bengaluru is modified.
The appellants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.6,02,000/- as against Rs.4,61,500/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till deposit.
Respondent No.2/Insurance Company shall deposit the entire compensation amount within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.
Sd/-
JUDGE.
Ksm*