IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO M.F.A. No.4028/2013 c/w M.F.A. CROB. No.169/2013 (MV) IN M.F.A. No.4028/2013 BETWEEN:
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, KRISHI BHAVAN, 5TH FLOOR, NRUPATUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001.
REP. BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, MR. SANDEEP. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI LAKSHMINARASAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI B.C. SEETHARAMA RAO, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. MR. SYED CHAND PASHA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O. MR. SYED MOHADDIN SAAB, 2. SMT. LEHANA TAAZ @ REHANA TAAZ AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, W/O. SYED CHAND PASHA, 3. MISS. FARARA @ FARHANA TAJ, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, D/O. SYED CHAND PASHA, 4. MR. SYED TAMEEM PASHA, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, S/O. SHED CHAND PASHA ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF KANNAMANGALA PALYA, DODDAPANAHALLI, KANAMANGALA POST, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
5. SRI MANANJAY KUMAR, MAJOR RESIDING AT NO.46/3, HOUSE OF WILLS, RICHMOND ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 025.
(OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE NO.KA-03/ED-3357). ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K.R. MURALI KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-4; NOTICE TO R-5 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O. DATED 13/06/2013) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:06.03.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.4006/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, AND XVIII ACMM, MACT, BENGALURU, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.7,82,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT IN TRIBUNAL.
IN M.F.A. CROB. No.169/2013 BETWEEN:
1. MR. SYED CHAND PASHA, S/O. MR. SYED MOHADDIN SAAB, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, 2. SMT. LEHANA TAAZ @ REHANA TAAZ W/O. SYED CHAND PASHA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, 3. MISS. FARARA @ FARHANA TAJ, D/O. SYED CHAND PASHA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, 4. MR. SYED TAMEEM PASHA, S/O. SYED CHAND PASHA, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF KANNAMANGALA PALYA, DODDAPPANAHALLI, KANNAMANGALA POST #84/1, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT.
PIN – 562 110. ... CROSS OBJECTORS (BY SRI MURALIKRISHNA K.R., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. M/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, KRISHIBHAVAN, 5TH FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER MR. SANDEEP.
2. SRI MANANJAY KUMAR, AGED MAJOR, #46/3, HOUSE OF WILLS, RICHMOND ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 025. ... RESPONDENTS THIS MFA CROB IN MFA NO.4028/2013 IS FILED U/O 41 RULE 22 OF CPC, R/W SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:06.03.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.4006/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXVIII ACM, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
APPEAL AND MFA CROSS OBJECTION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Though these matters are listed for orders, with the consent of both the parties, these matters are taken up for final disposal.
2. The appeal and cross objection are directed against the judgment and award dated 6.3.2013 passed in MVC No.4006/2011 by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH 13).
3. These matters pertain to death of one Adil Pasha @ Syed Adil Pasha who said to have met with an accident on 18.6.2011 at about 11.30 a.m. near Penukonda towards Penukonda, Andhra Pradesh, when he was proceeding on a motor cycle bearing No.KA 03 ED 3357 as a pillion rider. At that time, there was puncture to the front wheel of the bike but however, the rider Firoz Pasha without stopping the bike had carelessly and negligently continued riding of the bike as a result the vehicle started wobbling and hit another motor cycle bearing No.KA 04 EL 5194. Due to the impact the deceased fell down and had sustained grievous injuries over his body. He was immediately taken to Govt. Hospital, Hindupura and thereafter he was brought to NIMHANS, Bangalore and thereafter to Sita Bhateja Hospital, Longford Gardens, Bengaluru wherein he was treated as inpatient but the treatment was not successful and he had succumbed to the injuries on the next day. A case has been registered by Ashokanagara Police in UDR No.3/2011. The PM was conducted and a criminal case has been registered against the rider of the offending vehicle.
4. The legal heirs of deceased have preferred the claim petition. The petition was resisted by the respondent –Insurance company. The learned Member of the Tribunal adjudicated the matter by considering the accident, negligence and injury and loss of dependency etc., and has awarded a total compensation of Rs.7,82,000/- together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit with it which are as follows:-
1. Loss of dependency Rs.7,02,000/-
2. Loss of Estate Rs. 10,000/-
3. Loss of love and affection Rs. 20,000/-
4. Transportation & funeral expenses Rs. 20,000/-
5. Medical expenses Rs. 30,000/-
5. The notional income is assessed at Rs.5,000/- p.m. The victim was said to be carrying the occupation of painting and tinkering and the monthly income has been assessed at Rs.5000/-p.m. as against Rs.10,000/- p.m. 30% is added towards future prospects and 50% is deducted in respect of personal expenses.
6. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company- Sri Laxminarasappa submitted that the monthly income considered by the Tribunal is unreasonable and on the higher side. The Tribunal has erred to take income of the deceased at Rs.5000/- as in the year 2011, there could not have been that much salary.
7. The learned counsel for the Claimants- Cross objectors would submit that the Tribunal has taken less income at Rs.5000/- in considering the compensation towards loss of dependency. Further expenditure as stated therein are to the extent of Rs.80,000/-. But considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the deceased was said to be painter at the time of his death and his family consists of his parents, sister and brother who were depended upon him. The occurrence of the accident, the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle and liability of the insurance company are not disputed.
8. The bone of contention regarding quantum of compensation with regard to loss of dependency, the Tribunal should have included/added 40% towards future prospects considering that victim was a painter by profession and used to do tinkering work. But the income is correctly assessed by the Tribunal. In the result, the claimants are entitled for Rs.7,56,000/- (40% of Rs.5000/- = 2,000/- total Rs.7000/-, 50% is to be deducted towards personal expenses. Then it comes to Rs.3500 (income) x 12 (months) x 18 (multiplier). Rs.30,000/- is granted towards conventional heads.
9. Hence Cross Objection No.169/2013 is allowed in part. The claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.7,86,000/- as against Rs.7,82,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Insurance Company is directed to deposit immediately enhanced compensation with interest within four weeks from today. Amount deposited by the Insurance Company shall be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. The apportionment of compensation and interest awarded by the Tribunal is undisturbed. The MFA No.4028/2013 filed by the Insurance Company fails and the same is rejected.
Sd/- JUDGE nm