IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MAY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR MFA No.9187 OF 2013 (MV) BETWEEN 1. YOGA S/O NINGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS 2. ASHA W/O YOGA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS VIJAPURA VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI, ARKALUD TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT – 573 201.
... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. GIRISH B. BALADARE, ADVOCATE) AND IBRAHITHULLA S/O ABDUL LATHIF AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS NO.28, N T ROAD NEAR TEMPO STAND, SHIVAMOGA SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-573 221.
(RESPONDENT SERVED) ... RESPONDENT THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.08.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.64/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, ARKALGUD, 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 appeal though listed for admission, is taken up for final disposal having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants – claimants. Learned counsel for the respondent – owner of the offending vehicle is served but remains unrepresented.
3. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 07.08.2012 of the MACT, Arkalgud passed in MVC No.64/2010 granting compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. This appeal has been preferred seeking for enhancement of the said compensation.
4. The factual matrix is that on 21.03.2010 when the appellants who were husband and wife were proceeding to Hassan along with their two minor children in a motor bike bearing Regn.No.KA-13-U- 2071, when they reached Hassan-Gorur road near pump house, Beekanahalli Koppalu, the driver of the offending car bearing Regn.No.KA-03-Z-6027 had come from Hassan side in high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and is said to have dashed the bike. As a result, the appellants sustained simple and grievous injuries and took treatment in S.C. Hospital, Hassan and Sanjeevini Hospital, Hasan. However, they lost their son Yashavanth aged four years in the said accident. Hence, they filed a claim petition in MVC No.64/2010 seeking compensation for the death of their son.
5. After service of notice, Respondent – owner of the offending car appeared through counsel but however did not file any written statement to resist the claim of the appellants. In support of their case, the appellants examined themselves as PWs 1 to 4 and got examined a Doctor as PW.5. The Tribunal then framed issues for its consideration and answered the issues in the affirmative and proceeded to partly allow the claim of the appellants for compensation. It is this judgment which is under challenge in this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
6. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side since the appellants have lost their four year old son and they have to suffer throughout their life. The Apex Court having awarded more compensation in similar cases, he contends that the same yardstick requires to be applied in awarding considerable compensation towards the death of their son.
7. On a careful evaluation of the material on record, it is seen that the respondent – owner of offending vehicle did not choose to cross-examine PW.1 to PW.4. Hence, the Tribunal rightly came to the conclusion that the evidence of PWs 1 to 4 corroborates with documentary evidence and thus the claimants had proved that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.
In order to arrive at the compensation to be granted for the death of the four year old boy, the Tribunal had relied on a decision of this Court in the case of S. Sana Ulla and another vs. A.R. Shivashankar and others (ILR 2008 KAR 1896), wherein it is held that Rs.2,25,000/- compensation ought to be granted for the death of children aged 10 to 15 years. However, in the present case on hand, the deceased was a minor boy aged about 4 years. Hence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the appellants were entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- for the death of their four year old son and granted compensation accordingly.
I find justification in the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal granting compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition. Hence, there is no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal.
The appeal stands dismissed. Consequently, the award passed by the Tribunal is hereby confirmed.
Office to draw the decree accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE KS