IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR M.F.A.NO.1243 OF 2017(MV) BETWEEN 1. MR. PRADEEP RAO S/O. LATE. MADHAVA RAO AGED 50 YEARS 2. SMT. VANISHREE W/O. PRADEEP RAO AGED 41 YEARS 3. MASTER SRAJAN RAO S/O. PRADEEP RAO AGED 13 YEARS APPELLANT NO.3 SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN AND FATHER APPELLANT NO.1 MR. PRADEEP RAO ALL ARE RESIDING AT H NO.2-248/4A9 SHRI LAXMI SAGAR NIVAS, SONALIKA JALIGUDDA, BAJAL POST, MANGALORE TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT PIN– 575 102. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. G. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADVOCATE) AND 1. MR. PRADARSHAN S/O. KRISHNA SHERIGAR ADULT, R/AT D NO.12-54(1) DURGA NIVAS, NEERALLKE KALLABETTU POST & VILLAGE MOODABIDRI, MANGALURU TALUK D.K. DISTRICT, PIN-574 227.
2. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. OFFICE AT: 1ST FLOOR, GRANESH MAHAL MUNICIPAL MAIN ROAD, KUNDAPURA UDUPI DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, PIN-576 201. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.R. RENUKA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 SERVED) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 24.11.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.1680/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL UDGE, MEMBER, MACT, MANGALURU, D.K., PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the appellants- claimants challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 24.11.2016 passed by the learned II Additional Sr. Civil Judge, Mangaluru (for short ‘the Tribunal’), in M.V.C.No.1680/2015 whereby the Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.6,07,000/- together with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of claim petition till realization in favour of the appellants- claimants on account of death of Sagar Rao in a fatal accident that took place on 06.09.2015.
2. Though the matter is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
3. Both the counsels submit that the occurrence of accident as well as the coverage of the policy of the offending vehicle by the Insurance Company is not in dispute and this appeal is restricted to quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
4. Appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents of deceased Sagar Rao and appellant No.3 is the younger brother of deceased Sagar Rao who died in fatal accident that occurred on 06.09.2015. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants that the deceased Sagar studied vocational course in IIT and was working as a part-time mechanic thereby earning income of Rs.5,000/- p.m. It was further contended that the parents and minor younger brother of deceased Sagar Rao are entitled to a compensation not only under the head ‘loss of dependency’ but also under the head ‘love and affection’ as well as transportation of dead body etc. on account of death of the said Sagar Rao due to the accident.
5. By the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal come to the conclusion that the income of the deceased has to be taken as Rs.4,000/- p.m. and secondly, a total sum of Rs.6,0,7000/- was awarded in favour of the appellants-claimants as hereunder:
1 Towards love and affection Rs. 1,50,000.00
6. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that unimpeached evidence on record adduced by the appellants-claimants, in particular, the evidence of PW.1 to PW.3 and the documentary evidence on record would clearly establish that the monthly income of the appellants is in fact Rs.4,500/- p.m. and not Rs.4,000/- p.m., as wrongly held by the Tribunal. It was also contended that the Tribunal committed an error in not adding 40% of the aforesaid income of Rs.4,500/-p.m. for the purpose of computing ‘loss of dependency’. It is therefore by adding 40% to the income of Rs.4,500/- p.m., the income is to be reckoned as Rs.6,300/- p.m. Since the deceased was a bachelor, 50% would have to be deducted towards personal expenses and consequently, the notional income can be taken up for the loss of dependency as Rs.3,150/- p.m., in view of the law laid down by Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited V. Pranay Sethi and Ors reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680. By applying multiplier of 18 in terms of the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Limited and another reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121, the total compensation under the head ‘loss of dependency’ comes to Rs.6,80,400/- (3,150/-x18x12= Rs.6,80,400/-).
7. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 – Insurance Company is right in submitting that the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- under the head ‘loss of love and affection’. In this context, in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co.Ltd. V. Nanu Ram reported in 2018 SCC online Pages 6 to 9 are corrected and replaced vide Court order dated: 19.12.2019 SC 1546, the appellants-claimants being the parents and brother of the deceased Sagar Rao, they would be entitled to a sum of Rs.30,000/- each towards ‘love and affection’ and not Rs.1,50,000/- as wrongly awarded by the Tribunal. Thus, the claimants are entitled to a total sum of Rs.90,000/- under the head ‘loss of consortium’.
8. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants, the Tribunal has committed an error in not awarding any compensation under the head ‘loss of estate’ and as such, the appellants-claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.15,000/- under this head and a sum of Rs.15,000/- is awarded under the head ‘funeral expenses’.
9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal has to be re- worked as hereunder:
Pages 6 to 9 are corrected and replaced vide Court order dated: 19.12.2019
incidental charges Total Rs. 8,00,400/-
10. Since, the Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.6,07,000/- in favour of the claimants-appellants together with interest @ 9% p.a., they are entitled to an additional enhanced compensation in a sum of Rs.1,93,400/- which shall carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till realization.
11. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following:
ORDER (i) The appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 24.11.2016 passed by the learned II Additional Sr. Civil Judge, Mangaluru in M.V.C.No.1680/2015 is hereby set aside.
Pages 6 to 9 are corrected and replaced vide Court order dated: 19.12.2019 (iii) The appellants-claimants is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,93,400/- which shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization.
(iv) The apportionment and disbursement to be done as per the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE SSD Pages 6 to 9 are corrected and replaced vide Court order dated: 19.12.2019