IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8210 OF 2013 C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8219 OF 2013 & MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL CROB NO.83 OF 2018 (MV) IN MFA NO.8210/2013 BETWEEN:
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE 5TH FLOOR, KRISHI BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-01.
REP. BY ITS ADM. OFFICER SRI SANDEEP.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI. LAKSHMI NARASAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SEETHARAMA RAO B. C., ADVOCATE) AND 1. SMT.PADMAVATHI S.B. AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS W/O LATE ASHWATH 2. MASTER SRIKANTH AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS S/O LATE ASHWATH 3. KUM. BHAVANA AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS D/O LATE ASHWATH 4. SRI N. CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O LATE VENKATAPPA @ VENKATAPPA DAS 5. SMT. JAYALAKSHMI @ JAYALAKSHMAMMA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS W/O N. CHANDRAPPA RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 ARE MINORS, REP. BY THEIR MOTHER THE FIRST RESPONDENT HEREIN.
ALL ARE PERMANENT RESIDENTS OF NARASAPURA VILLAGE KOLAR TALUK & DISTRICT NOW AT: GURUMMA COMPOUND T.C. PALYA, K.R. PURAM BANGALORE 560036.
6. SRI JAVEED PASHA S/O MR. AHMED JAN R/O RAHAMATH NAGAR KOLAR TOWN (EXPARTE)-563101. (OWNER OF LORRY NO.KA.07-9390) ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N.GOPALAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R5; NOTICE TO R6 D/W; R2 & R3 ARE MINORS REPT BY R1) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:26.07.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.3690/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE XX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.14,40,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA NO.8219/2013 BETWEEN UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE 5TH FLOOR, KRISHI BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD BANGALORE-01 REP BY ITS ADMN. OFFICER SRI. SANDEEP.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI.SEETHARAMA RAO B C., ADVOCATE) AND 1. SRI NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA 2. SMT. MUNIVENKATAMMA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS W/O SRI. NANJAPPA PERMANENT RESIDENTS OF NARASAPUR VILLAGE, KOLAR TALUK & DISTRICT.
NOW AT: NO.125, II FLOOR VIJAYA REDDY BUILDING I CROSS, I MAIN, SINGASANDRA HOSUR ROAD, BANGALORE-560 068.
3. SRI. JAVEED PASHA S/O MR. AHMED JAN R/O RAHAMATH NAGAR, KOLAR TOWN (EXPARTE)-563 101. (OWNER OF LORRY NO.07-9390) ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N GOPALKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; NOTICE TO R3 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:26.7.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.3691/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 20TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.6,93,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION OF THE AMOUNT.
IN MFA CROB.83/2018 BETWEEN 1. SRI. NANJAPPA S/O LATE MUNIVENKATAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 2. SMT MUNIVENKATAMMA W/O NANJAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS BOTH ARE PERMANENT RESIDENT OF NARASAPURA VILLAGE & POST KOLAR TALUK & DISTRICT.
NOW RESIDING AT NO.125 2ND FLOOR, VIJAYA REDDY BUILDING 1ST CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD SINGASANDRA BANGALORE.
... CROSS OBJECTORS (BY SRI. GOPAL KRISHNA N, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE 5TH FLOOR, KRUSHI BHAVAN NRUPATUNGA ROAD HUDSON CIRCLE BENGALURU-1.
REP BY ITS MANAGER.
2. SRI JAVEED PASHA S/O AHMED JAN MAJOR IN AGE RESIDING AT RAHAMATH NAGAR KOLAR-563101.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B C SEETHARAMA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 D/W VIDE ORDER DATED 26.06.2019) THIS MFA CROB IN MFA 8219/2013 PASSED U/O.41 RULE 22 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.26.07.2013 PASSED ON MVC NO.3691/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, 20TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-22), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS AND CROSS OBJECTION ARE COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
J U D G M E N T Though these appeals are listed for admission, the same are taken up for final disposal with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.
2. These appeals are directed against the common judgment and award dated 26.07.2013 passed in M.V.C. Nos.3690/2012 & 3691/2012 on the file of the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, XX Additional Small Causes Judge, Bengaluru.
3. M.F.A.No.8210/2013 is preferred by the insurer challenging the quantum of compensation, whereby the claimants in M.V.C.No.3690/2012 have been awarded a total compensation of Rs.14,40,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the death of one Sri Ashwath.
4. M.F.A.No.8219/2013 is filed by the insurer challenging the quantum of compensation awarded in M.V.C.No.3691/2012, wherein the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs.6,93,000/- for the death of one Sri Muniraju @ Appi.
5. M.F.A. CROB. No.83/2018 is preferred by the claimants in M.V.C.No.3691/2012 seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
6. The brief facts of the case are that on 17.03.2012, the deceased by name Ashwath and the deceased by name Muniraju @ Appi were going on a Hero Honda Splendor motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-08- J-9754 from Kolar towards Narasapura. Muniraju was riding the said motorcycle and Ashwath was the pillion rider. When they reached near Mettubande Gate on Bengaluru-Kolar NH-4 Road, at about 1:30 p.m., the driver of lorry bearing registration No.KA-07-9390 by driving the said lorry in a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner hit against the motorcycle from behind, due to which, both the rider and the pillion rider fell down from the motorcycle and sustained grievous head injuries and they succumbed to the injuries on the spot.
7. The claimants in M.F.A.No.8210/2013 (M.V.C.No.3690/2012) are the wife, two minor children and the parents of deceased Ashwath.
8. The claimants in M.F.A.No.8219/2013 (M.V.C.No.3691/2012) are the parents of deceased Muniraju @ Appi.
9. Both the claim petitions were filed seeking a total compensation of Rs.25 lakhs each. Before the Tribunal, the wife of the deceased Ashwath was examined as PW.1 and the father of deceased Muniraju was examined as PW.2. Ex.P1 to Ex.P23 were got marked. Though the insurer disputed the claim, however no evidence was adduced before the Tribunal.
10. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence, awarded a total compensation of Rs.14,40,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization, in respect of M.V.C.No.3690/2012.
11. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.6,93,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization, in respect of M.V.C.No.3691/2012.
12. The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company would vehemently contend that the compensation awarded is on a higher side. He contended that the claimants have not adduced convincing evidence with regard to the income of the deceased and therefore, he submits that the income taken by the Tribunal is on a higher side. He further submits that the compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- awarded under the conventional heads in M.V.C.No.3690/2012 is on a higher side and the same is not in conformity with the settled law. He would contend that the claimants are entitled only for a sum of Rs.70,000/- under the conventional heads. He further contends that the Tribunal has added 50% of the income of the deceased towards future prospects which is also not in conformity with the settled law. He therefore contends that the total compensation of Rs.14,40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal in MVC No.3690/2012 is excessive and seeks to modify the said judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
13. The learned counsel appearing for the insurer contended that the deceased in M.V.C.No.3691/2012 was a bachelor and the claimants have not adduced satisfactory evidence with regard to his income and further the Tribunal has erred in adding 50% of the income towards future prospects. Therefore, he contends that the total compensation of Rs.6,93,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is excessive and seeks to modify the said judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
14. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants in M.F.A.No.8210/2013 contended that the deceased was working as a driver and he was having an income of Rs.15,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month. Therefore, he submits that the same is not on the higher side. He further submits that the dependents are the wife, two minor children and parents of the deceased and the Tribunal, after considering the number of dependants, awarded a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- under the conventional heads. Therefore, he submits that the total compensation awarded by the tribunal is just and reasonable and seeks to dismiss M.F.A.No.8210/2013.
15. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants in M.F.A.No.8219/2013, who has also filed M.F.A. CROB No.83/2018 seeking enhancement of compensation awarded in M.V.C.No.3691/2012, contends that the deceased was doing vegetable business and earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month. Therefore, the Tribunal was not justified in taking the income at Rs.4,500/- per month. He further contends that the compensation awarded under the conventional heads is on a lower side. Therefore, he seeks to enhance the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
16. It is the case of the claimants that the deceased were traveling on a motorcycle on 17.3.2012 and the said motorcycle met with an accident near Mettubande Gate near Bengaluru-Kolar, NH-4 Road on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of lorry bearing registration No.KA-07-9390. The accident in question and the negligence on the part of the driver of the said lorry is not seriously disputed. The Tribunal, after placing reliance on the copy of the FIR, complaint, mahazar, sketch, MV report which are marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P5 has come to the conclusion that the accident was on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the lorry. It is also not in dispute that the said lorry was insured.
MFA No.8210/2013 (MVC No.3690/2012) 17. According to the learned counsel appearing for the insurer, the income assessed by the Tribunal in respect of deceased Ashwath was on a higher side. In this connection, it is to be seen that according to the claimants, the deceased was working as a driver and he was having income of Rs.15,000/- per month. PW1 is the wife of the deceased. Apart from her evidence with regard to income, there is no other acceptable evidence to show that deceased was earning the said amount. The Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month. The same is not challenged by the claimants. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the income assessed by the Tribunal cannot be said to be on a higher side.
18. It is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company that the Tribunal has added 50% of the income towards future prospects and the same is not proper. The deceased was aged about 37 years at the time of accident. The income of the deceased has been assessed at Rs.6,000/- per month. Hence, to the said income 40% ought to have been added towards future prospects. Considering the number of dependents, 1/4th of the income is deducted towards personal expenses. Deceased being 37 years of age, 15 is the appropriate multiplier to be applied.
19. It is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the insurer that a total sum of Rs.2,25,000/- has been awarded under the conventional heads which is not in conformity with the settled law. It is seen that the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for loss of consortium, Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of care and guidance for minor children and Rs.25,000/- towards funeral and obsequies expenses. In view of the settled position, the said sum awarded is on a higher side. Under the conventional heads a sum of Rs.70,000/- is awarded towards loss of consortium to the wife, towards funeral and transportation expenses. It is also seen that the other claimants are the two minor children and parents of the deceased. Hence, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, Rs.25,000/- each is awarded to the two minor children and to the parents of the deceased towards loss of love and affection.
20. Hence, the claimants in M.V.C.No.3690/2012 are entitled to a sum of Rs.6000 + Rs.2,400 = Rs.8,400 – Rs.2,100 = Rs.6,300 X 12 X 15 = Rs.11,34,000 + Rs.1,70,000 = Rs.13,04,000 as against Rs.14,40,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
MFA No.8219/2013 & MFA Crob.No.83/2018 (MVC No.3691/2012) 21. According to the learned counsel for the insurer, the deceased was a bachelor and the claimants are the parents. The income of the deceased assessed by the Tribunal is without any basis and the Tribunal has erred in adding 50% towards the future prospects.
22. It is seen that PW.1, the father of the deceased has stated that the deceased was doing vegetable business and earning Rs.25,000/- per month. Apart from his oral testimony, there is no other corroborative piece of evidence to hold that the deceased was having income of Rs.25,000/- per month.
23. The learned counsel appearing for the claimants would contend that the income taken by the Tribunal at Rs.4,500/- per month is on a lower side. The accident is of the year 2012. The deceased was aged about 32 years at the time of accident. Considering the evidence on record and the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the year of accident, notional income of Rs.7,000/- is taken as the income of the deceased as against Rs.4,500/- taken by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has added 50% of the income towards future prospects which is not proper. 40% has to be added towards future prospects. The appropriate multiplier is 16. The deceased being a bachelor, ½ of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenses.
24. Hence, the claimants in M.V.C.No.3691/2012 is entitled for a compensation of Rs.7000 + Rs.2,800 = Rs.9,800/50 = Rs.4,900 X 12 X 16 = Rs.9,40,800/-
towards loss of dependency. A sum of Rs.30,000/- is awarded towards conventional heads and another sum of Rs.50,000/- is awarded towards love and affection to the claimants who are the parents of the deceased. In all the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.10,20,800/- as against Rs.6,93,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, I pass the following:-
ORDER M.F.A.No.8210/2013 is allowed in part.
The judgment and award dated passed in M.V.C.No.3690/2012 on the file of the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, XX Additional Small Causes Judge, Bengaluru is hereby modified. The claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.13,04,000/- as against Rs.14,40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
M.F.A. CROB. No.83/2018 is hereby allowed in part.
The claimants in M.V.C.No.3691/2012 are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.10,20,800/- as against Rs.6,93,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
M.F.A.No.8219/2013 is dismissed.
The amount in deposit before this Court shall be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith.
I.A.No.1/2018 does not survive for consideration.
Accordingly, the same is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE PYR