MFA N0.8099.07
, nmwnmn:
1% /'v'g,;_._j .:7.':'\.w"1'c.7-
(6, _/_,;._..(Z.,..
Wational Insurance Co. Ltd Q
No.19/4, Sax-panchal Ama':e-'.¢, _
9+. \=t-""3"" _ 1" Floor, Dinnur Main Road, _ --
M ' -lb -L},-,,g.7 Bangalore -- 560 032, ' I V V
M 4,. *r'°"' Now represented hyits
V' ' Divisional Manager, 1. _
Divisional omcc Nc*;{1._1, . .
4"! Floor, Toéivcr » " j_ _
Unity Building, J--f3.;,Reac!--,w " A - A
Banga1ore":.=5:3<:s%oo2; : APPELLANT
[By an. izgrlnj sn 1e£-;;m§a,"V%Aa§.;%_ %
V 1 "L"Q ..... .. "
"'.""'7"-"~.'1I
.1. . -,\,Jx.u I.-3
* . W!o%1€vmw:nna»
;..',_._...'-! ran .;.. ...g_
':1 "'
4 ycq.-ua,
. Ciiautiana,
D/0 Kempanna,
Aged" 10 years,
A TRep.-by its Natural Guaxdian- R-1,
Smt. Mala,
" -._A.gw:d_ 29 yI:::3_.,
Muster Dhanush,
S] o. Kempanna.
Aged 6 years,
Rep. by its Natural Guardian- R-1,
Smt. Maia, Aged 29
MFA No.8099.0'7
4. S11. M. Muniraju.
Sio. Sri. Mekala' ppa,
Aged 60 years,
1.3'
Smt, Smojamma,
Wlo Sri. Muniraju,
Annual An Iranian
I159" "ru _y\.-nun,
9|
imanda Kumar.
S] 0. Sri. Muniraju.
Aged 30 years,
7. Sri. K.PIakash.
Qln Hr-inhnnnnnc
"I V' '"*"""*""rr"'I . .1 .
Kunduvathi (ViJ1agev&.'~l-'?_ostf:, .4 V *
C1.:1.1-..1....11...pu1. rP..I.-.1".-. ..
Kolar District. ' 1 A
" 1 __:f.Rl5BP0lIDElI'l'B
This appeal 5is_f1led«ui-3 173(1) offlie Motor Vehicles Act
n:-ngainst the 5;Juci_+;;mefit. dated 11.01.2007 passed in
WW0 No_.3H14G.[ one 'the file of the Addl. Judge, Court of
em Gauges,' g'is.J!e.rx-;?;:i:;z', Memhez°;"In.ri.A.CF-V, l\.I!et.n;J},1o11'.Li.a;;
Bangalore ._ (SC<3HV.._"No;5)';-.,__a1ave1diI1g a compensation of
Rs.4,:"$4,GGU:._i-- pas. fr"m the date of petfihn
till deposin » '
j This coming on for admission. this day. the Court
'~ the fol1o'wm.g:\ e
1. This appeal by the insurance Company aggrieved
'"by_the of compensation awarded by the Clam s
A vide its judgement and award dated 11.01.2007 in
1 _h,41.V.C.No.3140/2006.
MFA No.8099.0'7
2. One n inpan ta alias nemmflc-'....a was ..L1_!ed in an
accident that took place on when a temmwifiven
by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed'
him while he was walking on Karahalli cross--,j:
Resort. His widow, children. it '
petition claiming compensation ul of
Act. The first claimant herself as I L'
.9 R8 w..ze pmd.I_1...ed ,n__d_ - =.fI'he respondent though
the copy of the “ti mark”d as
Ex.R.1. it idocumentary evidence
placed _on_ a finding that the
accident account [of the actionable negligence on
the part of the In so far as the claim made
for Vcgompensationj’ tl1e’V”I’n:bunal disbelieved the version of the
that._.the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.6,500/-
_,’d
E!
n:
I23
‘E
I
g.
£2
E
E
-3
553
E:
0!:
::
t:
n.
{D
-1
’15’
-I
3
*2:
2.
SB
8
<
1:)
Is
Up
Doddahailapur. However, 'coking ** m- ofiaer materials the
' Tribunalifound that the monthly income of the deceased had to
at Rs.3,000/- p.m. Having regaxd to the age of the
deceased at the time of accident (30 years) and after deducting
1/ 3"' towards his personal expenses, the 'l'rihuna1 applying the
ea"
MFA No.8099.07
multiplier of 16. quantmcd Lu l”ss of dependency at
Rs.3,84.000/-. As against other conventional heads like loss
of consortium. loss of love and affection and loss of
amount ranging from F.’s.15,000/- to Rs.20.0G(:):i
awarded. Totally a sum of Rs.4t.54».-000f_”-tlllisl
compensation along with interest p.:a.
petition till the date of payIne1~}{‘*~.\V_
3. Learned counsel that the
amount awarded towards ‘ and loss of
estate at Rs.20,0QQ1f- each; on side and requires
int… .erence _y.ti1_is’ ,l ; A
4. lzpvhave the materials on record. The
Tnbunalihasettaken of the deceased at Rs.3.000/-
ha\(i:_$Ig’ !’.€gaIxd”‘t’11e’V’fact that the claimant had failed to
_ .. .1’.
;£’..”.._},Y”{_’,_…..1.T£I.eI1t._I’_\,f evid..nce ‘_n su port of her assertion
that he’? “ms “etting R.6.500,’- pm. as ..a.azy; Th…
accident’ has taken place on The deceased ‘W11
V’ was vrerlking in a private establishment as an employee. was
V-..l1aJef=and healthy. He uias aged about 30 years at the time of
his death. He has left behind a young widow aged 28 years
and two minor children aged 9 and 5 years iespectively apart
1%
MFA No.-3099.07
Rs.3,000/ – p.m. Though the sum awarded towards lose-“of iove
and aflection and loss of estate is mar@’nally on the.E3itg1ee:rT::side
having regard to the totality of the cheumsmafices
conservative approach adopted in ;~eco:e¢mg«,M the
monthly income of the deceased. I
this arpeal. Hence, the diefl1iee.ed*de*Jbid of L’
“exit”
94:1-
tau; M
.. _1____ya
JmI–
Ch
nu: IIIA 8099I200’7
1 -%-2%
There is a mistake in showing the name of _
I—–…
1* #9 wow» {W4 €d’ar1(.$ -H -0?
!’-…….-“Ia .A._…1.m=I__-_. ___pa;1y Limited”, the a3;_ip-a-.’ila1′;t_’s’~ 2;]
..hb.’.’.fi as «Nae.-J__.P_a1 gnemrnnee C.3 nqanv ‘Thi.-1His_.3a é
Hence. it. is ordered ‘§th§v’hppcflant shall
be corrected as Limited’,
gee the name company Limited’.
The H<":ut and a fresh certified
copy be issu e.1_
Sd/F M
Tudgé
L; the cause me,_ Instead of describing ;1:11¢:__iitppe_:l'lV:'a'I'1fLt.:#_=t_f:3'V"'l'l¢V';f'\a7V E k
{j_______———