1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7520/2011 BETWEEN:
1. SAROJAMMA W/O NARASIMHEGOWDA @ PUTTARAJU AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS 2. ARPITHA D/O NARASIMHEGOWDA @ PUTTARAJU AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS 3. CHALUVARAJU S S/O NARASIMHEGOWDA @ PUTTARAJU AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS 4. NINGAMMA W/O NARASIMHEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF PETE VOKKALAGERI BY THE SIDE OF ITI COLLEGE KANAKAPURA ROAD MALAVALLI TOWN …APPELLANTS (BY SHRI. M.Y. SREENIVASAN, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. L. RAJU S/O LAKSHMAN MAJOR R/O NO.52, 2ND MAIN ROAD 8TH CROSS, B.K.NAGAR YASHWANTHPURA BANGALORE-22 2 2. CHOLAMANDALAM DHS FINANCE LIMITED DARE HOUSE, NO.2 NSC BOSE ROAD PARRY’S CHENNA-10 … RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI. K.S.RAVI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1- SERVED, UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 28.06.2011 PASSED IN MVC NO.111/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, MALAVALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT Heard.
2. Shri M.Y. Sreenivasan, learned advocate for the appellant urged a solitary contention that the accident has taken place in the year 2009 and therefore, the learned Tribunal has erred in considering the earning capacity of the deceased as Rs.3,000/-.
3. This Court has consistently reckoned the earning capacity in the absence of any material as Rs.5,000/- for 3 the year 2009. If the compensation is recalculated by taking the earning capacity at Rs.5,000/-, total compensation works out to Rs.5,60,000/- (5,000*12*14(multiplier)-1/3). Under conventional head, learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.70,000/-. Therefore, enhanced compensation amounts to Rs.6,30,000/-. However, it is noticed that by erroneous calculation, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.6,87,000/-, which is in excess of what is claimed or otherwise entitled to .
4. Since, there is no cross-appeal, in the circumstances, in my view, this appeal does not survive for consideration and it is accordingly dismissed.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE AV