IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2667 OF 2014 [MV] BETWEEN 1. NETRAVATHI, W/O. LATE MAHESH, AGE 24 YEARS, HOUSE HOLD WORK R/O. KATHLAGERE VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK-577 213.
2. BHARATH @ SHARATH, S/O. LATE MAHESH, AGE 3 YEARS, MINOR, 3. JEEVAN, S/O. LATE MAHESH, AGE 2 YEARS, MINOR, APPELLANT NOS.2 AND 3 ARE REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER 1ST APPELLANT-NETRAVATHI. ... APPELLANTS [BY SRI. SHASHIDHARA R., ADVOCATE] AND 1. THE MD VRL LOGISTICS READ AND ADMN OFFICE, BANGALORE ROAD, VARUN, HUBLI-580 020.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., MMK-COMPLEX, AKKAMAHADEVI ROAD, DAVANAGERE-577 001.
3. JAYAMMA, W/O. LATE RUDRAPPA @ HEGADE RUDRAPPA, 62 YEARS, HOUSE HOLDER, R/O. KURUBARA BEEDI, NEAR BEERALINGESHWARA TEMPLE, CHANNAGIRI TOWN-577 213. ... RESPONDENTS [BY SRI. B.C. SEETHARAMA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R2.
NOTICE TO R1- R3 ARE DISPENSED WITH VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 01.07.2016] * * * THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 6.12.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.93/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, CHANNAGIRI, IN 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 This appeal is preferred by the claimant in MVC No.93/2012 on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge, MACT., Channagiri, seeking enhancement of compensation awarded therein for the death of one Sri. Mahesh in a road traffic accident.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2-Insurance Company.
3. The claimants are the widow and two minor children of the deceased. Respondent No.3 is the mother of the deceased. The Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.12,58,000/- with future interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. Further, the Tribunal has apportioned the compensation awarded to the wife, two minor children and mother of the deceased, who are petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and respondent No.3 in MVC No.93/2012 in the ratio of 35:25:25:15.
4. Seeking enhancement of compensation, the learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal has not at all considered the future prospects and therefore, the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is to be enhanced.
The learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company does not dispute the same. However, he submits that the Tribunal has awarded excess compensation and therefore, seeks to dismiss the appeal.
5. The accident in question involving the VRL bus bearing reg. No.KA-25/C-5975 owing to the rash and negligent driving by its driver and the said bus being insured with the 2nd respondent herein are not in dispute. It is also not disputed that three persons died in the said accident. The claimants are the legal heirs and dependants of deceased Mahesh, who was one of the victims. According to the claimants, he was earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- p.m. being the owner and driver of the Trax vehicle. The Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.7,000/- p.m. after considering the evidence and material on record. The same is not in dispute.
6. The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellants is that the Tribunal has not added any amount towards future prospects. The deceased was aged 31 years at the time of the accident. In view of the Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157, an addition of 40% of the income has to be made towards future prospects. Deduction of 1/4th from the income, towards personal expenses is proper. The appropriate multiplier applicable to the age of the deceased is ‘16’ and therefore, a sum of Rs.14,11,200/- [Rs.7,000 + 2,800 = Rs.9,800 – 2,450 = Rs.7,350 x 12 x 16] has to be awarded as against Rs.10,08,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of dependency. In so far as the compensation awarded under other heads, there is no appeal preferred by the Insurance Company. In view of the same, I pass the following:
ORDER The appeal is allowed in part. The Judgment and Award dated 06.12.2013 passed in MVC No.93/2012 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT., Channagiri is modified.
The appellants and respondent No.3 are entitled for an enhanced compensation of Rs.4,03,200/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in MVC No.93/2012. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The apportionment and disbursement of the enhanced compensation to petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and respondent No.3 before the Tribunal, shall be in terms of the order passed by the Tribunal.
Sd/- JUDGE.
Ksm*