IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3194/2016 (MV) Between:
1. Smt. Munirathna @ Munirathnamma, W/o Late Sri Muniraju Aged about 33 years, 2. Master Manoj, S/o Late Muniraju Aged about 11 years, Minor represented by his mother & Natural Guardian- the 1st Appellant, 3. Sri Venkataramanappa, S/o Chikkamuniveerappa, Aged about 63 years, 4. Smt. Venkatamma, W/o Venkataramanappa, Aged about 60 years, All are resident of Halasahalli Village, Hosakote Taluk, Bangalore- 562 114.
(By Sri Jwala Kumar, Advocate) …Appellants And:
1. Sri Munivenkatappa S/o Muniyappa, Major, No.36, Kannuruhalli, Doddagattiganabbe Post, Hoskote Taluk, Bangalore- 562 114.
2. The National Insurance Co. Ltd., Divisional Office, No.10, Unity Building Annex, 3rd Floor, Mission Road, Bangalore- 560 027. Represented by its Manager.
(By Sri A.M.Venkatesh, Advocate for R2;
…Respondents Notice to R1 dispensed with vide order dt:05.12.2017) This MFA is filed u/s 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award 20.08.2015 passed in MVC No.91/2013 on the file of the VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking of enhancement.
This appeal coming on for Orders this day, the court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT In view of the memo filed by the appellants, notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with at the risk of appellants.
2. Appeal is by the claimant/appellants as against the judgment and award dated 20.08.2015 passed in MVC No.91/2013 on the file of the VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru partly allowing the claim petition for compensation. The appellants have sought for enhancement. Accident is of the year 2013.
3. The claimant/appellants are wife, minor son and parents of the deceased, who succumbed to accidental injuries occurred on 18.05.2013. The claimants filed petition before the Tribunal seeking for compensation. The Tribunal has awarded sum of Rs.7.65,000/- with interest at 8% p.a. Aggrieved by the said judgment and award the appellants have preferred this Appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal on all the heads is on the lower side and same has to be enhanced.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent- Insurer supports the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and sought to dismiss the appeal.
6. I have heard learned counsel for both sides and I have gone through the materials available on record.
7. The ground taken for enhancement of compensation is that the notional income assessed by the Tribunal is stated to be on the lower side. It is submitted that the deceased was working as Painter and was earning Rs.500/- per day i.e., 15,000/- p.m. It has been disbelieved by the Tribunal as the claimants have not produced any documents.
8. In the cases of this nature, where the notional income is not proved, it has to be assessed, by taking into consideration age of the deceased, size of the family members, their residential address, by taking note of the standard of living and bank rate of interest.
In that view of the matter, the income assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Therefore the appellants are entitled for enhanced compensation. At this stage the learned counsel for both the parties have submitted that the they have settled the matter for a sum of Rs.4,10,000/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The said submission of both counsel is placed on record.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part.
The claimant is entitled for an enhanced compensation of Rs.4,10,000/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at 6% p.a. Accordingly, the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal stands modified to that extent. The deposit and release of the amount shall be as per the award.
Sd/- JUDGE DL