IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. L. NARAYANA SWAMY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MFA NO.6914 OF 2014 (MV) BETWEEN:
1. SMT. VANITHA SHETTY, W/O LATE GOPALA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O HEBBAGILUMANE, BALKUR VILLAGE & POST, KUNDAPURA TALUK – 576 217.
2. PAVANI, D/O LATE GOPALA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT ONE YEAR, MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HER GUARDIAN MOTHER SMT. VANITHA SHETTY, W/O LATE GOPALA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O HEBBAGILUMANE, BALKUR VILLAGE & POST, KUNDAPURA TALUK – 576 217.
3. SMT. JALAJAMMA M SHETTY, W/O LATE MAHABAL SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, R/AT NO.36, 1ST MAIN, 6TH CROSS, J.C.NAGAR, MAHALAKSHMIPURA, BANGALORE – 86.
... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. VISHWAJITH SHETTY S., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. MR.SRIDHAR, S/O RAJANNA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT HANUMAIAH HOUSE, BEHIND GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL, YANTAGANAHALLI POST, NELAMANGALA TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT – 560 201.
2. SRI. UMESH GOWDA, S/O LATE M.R.RANGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O SWAMY & SWAMY TOURS & TRAVELS, VIDYA NAGAR, SIRA TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT – 572 101.
3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INS. CO. LTD., IFFCO SADAN, C1 DISTRICT, CENTER SAKET, NEW DELHI – 110 017.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 D/W V/C/O DTD.22.01.2015) ---
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.08.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.618/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MACT, KUNDAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT The wife, daughter and mother of deceased Gopala Shetty made a claim petition for the RTA which took place on 14.03.2013 at about 7.50 p.m., when the deceased Gopala Shetty along with deceased Baby Hamshini and appellant and her daughter Pavani were proceeding in a motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KA.02.HN097d83 and when they reached near Manjushree Condiments and Bakery, Mahalakshmipura, Bengaluru, one bus bearing Reg.NO.KA.06.B.2098 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle and caused the accident. In the accident the husband of first appellant, father of second appellant and son of the third appellant, namely Gopala Shetty and baby Hamshini succumbed to the injuries. The appellant filed claim petition in MVC No.618/2013 before the Tribunal and Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.16,14,610/-. Being not satisfied with the said judgment and award the appellant is before this Court in this appeal.
2. It is the contention of the appellant that her husband was aged about 36 years at the time of accident and was working as a Marketing and selling Prakash Tea Powder within Bengaluru City limits and also doing petty real estate brokerage and earning Rs.35,000/- per month. In order to prove the avocation, the appellant has relied on Ex.P-14 to Ex.16 –paper publication in City Times, portion of statement in city publication and Bank pass book.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the wife though she has produced the documents, the same has been disbelieved by the Tribunal. He submits that under these circumstances, by considering the age of the deceased, it would be appropriate to take the income of the deceased towards future prospects. He further submits that compensation awarded on all the other heads are on lower side. Hence, he prays to allow the appeal and to modify judgment and award passed by the Tribunal by enhancing the compensation.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents supports the order of the Tribunal and prays to dismiss the appeal.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the pleadings.
6. The only ground canvassed by the appellant is by relying on Exs.14 to 16 in order to prove his income. The Tribunal has assigned reasons by disbelieving the evidence of PW.1 and also Exs.P.14 to 16 and has assessed the notional income at Rs.8,000/- which is sound and proper.
7. The deceased was the resident of Bengaluru.
Since he was aged about 36 years at the time of death, it would be appropriate to assess the future prospectus. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS ([2017]16 SCC 680) has held that if the age of the deceased is below 40 years, an addition of 40% of the income should be taken for calculating the future prospects. If the same is applied to this case, it would be Rs.3,200/- (8000x40%) and if Rs.3,200/- is added to Rs.8,000/-, the monthly income would be Rs.11,200/- and if 1/3rd is deducted towards personal expenses, the income would be Rs.7,466.66/- rounded of to Rs.7,500/-. Hence, loss of dependency works out to Rs.14,40,000/- (7500x12x16). The compensation awarded towards medical expenses remains undisturbed.
8. The compensation of Rs.55,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under conventional heads is on the lower side. It would be just and proper to award a sum of Rs. 70,000/-. The 2nd appellant is a minor aged about 1 year at the time of accident. She is a daughter of the deceased. Hence considering her agony in life. I am of the view that she has to be awarded Rs.1,50,000/- towards love and affection as against Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Thus, the claimants-appellants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.16,83,610/- as against Rs.16,14,610/-. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest. Impugned judgment and award shall stands modified.
9. Apportionment of the award amount and direction regarding deposit shall be made as per award of the Tribunal.
10. The amount in deposit, if any, is directed to be transferred to the MACT.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HR