IN THE HIGH comm' 014' KARNATAKA AT BANGAL{).I§%Z1_ T~.V_
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY,_:3k:i0~;¥.'_';--f f7 _
PRESENT
THE i'~iON'BLE MRJUSTICE VQQOPALA 'GQWDA $ T
AND
THE HC}N'BLE MR.JUS'"m§E N. Ai%i'A1~§I;xzi
M.1'+'.A.No.505ggigeotvjt:]'\&¥l':a«'._i«';3§..1§1o;k+s>{{2'i'"2003 (MV)
M.F.A.No.606li:2O~Q%i_';'. - 1.;
BE'I'wEEN_;___V »
The Brafich Ma;r;{aLgcr_» " _ ._
United {ndia I.ns1:araI'z-::"e:.
Shivamangala Buiidingf .. " = '
Chamlagiri Réjrad," Bhadravafhi
The brgatnch Managgérv I
" '~ IV;1s:11':s:'ir3<::»:'..--(';o. Ltd.
Branch Of3?1ce,"S;ation Road, Hespet~583 201
7.Reg:. 'by its Divisional Manager
Unimd &IT1:mz1ia.V£V11s§iir~1ncc Co. Ltd.
ii)i¢isi-anal Orifice
P.B.NQ.23_'f,' 34-V/3, Akkamahaclevi Road
'VMMK Ciqrfiplcx, 2nd I-'ioox
« -. 1 ' ~ . __ F..3 . Extensiéfin
' jlavanggcrc. ' ...Appc11ant
M.U.P0(macha as R.Pradecp Kumar, Advocates)
T %m;
U 1. Smt. Jayalaxmi
W/'0. Lain 1<;.S}:1cshagiri
Aged about 24 years M
V a§§'hcka1a=ppa
Advocate for R1 to R3; RS--Sc1ved; R4
. - Service of notice dispensed with)
' iact, agaénst the judgment and award dated 14011182006, pa:-med in
4 MVC 190.925/2005, can the fiit: of Acidl. MACT, Fast Track Court-II,
2. Sim. Dcvamma
W/0. Late Kariyappa
Aged about 52 years
3. Kumari Aishwazya
13/ 0. Late K.Shcshagiri
Aged 2 years
(since minor, rep. by her natural gua1*di:a;1T ' '
m0tl1er]i--responde1;.t} V _
All are 1*] :21: D.N0.37_1¥i..f 102, 'A"Block
2nd Main, Behind R ' " ,'e._hiag. Asia:-am _
Davanagere. ._ h" . vv ' _
4. S11' N.G.Gz£1ig£;giha1*;x =:
S/0. __ .
RI 6: %Mai1a:51fi-a._ V' '--..""¢,"3'ewa1HnV3a (Post),
S1tgii11r)'ge:A7.1f;éwJulc'i:3is'£)_i§si;.t*i<:rt. _
5. Sri 'S.S.Umcsh'. T'
S/0. ShivVashé:nk'araia'}:.
Aged 4'7"ycar$ "
;z]a:F..P1np."M_j's; sem', No.:-303
R€;.a;!.,..¢'3hadravathi
" . §"--'éa.*I:11<é1*'é;j '-name not known
"-M33701" %
a5 3"' Main, K. B. Extension
Davaiiageze. ... Respondents
This appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of Motor Vchicies
Davanagcrs, awarcfing ooznpensaticzn with interest at 6% per
annum fmm the date of petition til} the date cf payment of
Compensation 8:; etc. V
M. F.A. No.492[ 2008
B..E'I.."'i&'.1:3§.I§.;
1.
Smt. Jayalaxmi
W/0. Latc!{.S11c5hagin'
22 years
Smt. Dcvamma
Wjo. Late Kariyappa .
Soycara -A '
Aishwarya V V' ' * .1
D,' 0. Lair: K; = .
5 months 'o1d5baby~»{$i1z1c; mfildr, ,
her natilxai-I I fippeflant)
A3} ~a:é'1'~;g;::,D.f~5§;37'z4§] 10:§'_""""
Mcic ':33. 31or:.1.:9,_ 13' M'aipg,- _ «
Behind fishzam
Davanageze. " Appellants
(By s:ji;L:;311iva§1cu1a;_:s:;¥', A§ivo;:atc)
" A 8/0. Sitldiialingappa
of.--tankcr1or.ry bearing Reg.No.
K5415;/Aw2223, R} 0. Maliapura Village
Sa\'va,£@a Post, Shimoga Taluk Gr. District.
r _ SA;S.Umesh
S/0. Shfias
45 years
Owner of tanker lorry bearing
Reg. No.KA~14]1\--2223
R10. Prop. M[s.SGK'I' No.303
Channagiri Road, Bhadmvathi
Shimoga District. V
3. The Branch Manager
United india Insurance Company Lté.
Shivamemgala Building
Channagiri Road
Bhadravathi. 1
4. Chandrashckarappa ,
Owner of Marathi Onmi ° _ '
Bcazring Rcg.No.KA-35/ M-_1829
HI Main, K.Q.EXtenSiGI1
Davanagete. r
5. The Branch Manager' " . ..
United Inctia 'lnéiurancc. -- LVt_ciV.f '
Branch {)i'£ict:;jVi'S_ftai:i.(323 r?cad._.- fa V
Hospcti?58(}"'2{)"I;-V._ 9 Respondents
This agapéai; is. '*fiIed_ "t-md.cr Section 173(1) of Motor
Vehicles "=A<:'t,4 judgment and award dated
10.10.2G06,.._p'assed._ ifi~N'd.928/2005, on the file of the
Add}. sessions' Judge, -?'I':~ac1: Court-II as Adcii. MAUI',
Davanagcne, " aiiowing the claim petition for
* ;QOI}}pnéf';s{§1tio11 and":-;:?*.x;1g:ing enhancement of compensation 8:.
cizifi'-i u .
iii
A ihcsc. jlappcals coming on for admission this day,
GQWDA, J., delivered the following:
i
JUDGMENT
T he Miscellaneous First Appeal of the
M.F.A.No.492/ 2008, seeking enhancement of V-
iavith delay cf 364 days, accepfing the .exp1anafi61i” in
the afidavit in support; ofthe ‘deieafif this
belated appeal is eondoneg.g[¢;1e for
enhancement of filed by the
insurance for reduction of
compensefigre fiassed the common
judgmefit: . —
2. T]:ie*–._eoneetnesé’«e~i’ the impugned judgment and
by’1″:hc.Ad.d1. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
1§asefTraci§ cemi~1_;, Davangeze, {hereinafter cailed ‘man in
M’;’v§Ce.Ne’.’9fi8; dated 1().10.20€)6 is questioned by the
–insmeeuee”=’_ce$pany in M.F.A.No.6061/2007, inter alia
H ‘A that compensation awarded under the head ‘loss
ciepefidency’ by the Tribunal at Rs.7,68,000/- is on the
VT ‘hig”l:1er side. The learned Counsel for the insurance company
” has contended that Tnlbunal has placed strong reliance on
Ex.P.15, the salary certificate wherein it is sated that the
he]
deceased was working as a part time ‘I’.V. and
Technician in Mayur Eieetzmnics and accepted A’
claimants that the deceased was also b
independent shop. Accepting the J
has determined ‘loss of dependency’ v4é1V:A§:”4Es..’7,t3£5._,'(J!{}(‘A’)/ ‘V
finding is erroneous, as uatiziere “is evidence on
record. Therefore.’ ei’«.§§ogafi}ex3eénion under the
head” ‘loss of higher eide.
3. for ants would submit
that the Inonthiy deceased was determined at
Rs.6,00_()] ~, eiilich is proper evidence and does not
other hand, the claimants are
. V ‘ enéifled _:re.rd enhanced oompensafion.
A fieference to the above said rival claims, the
” thi:-itvéozlld arise for our determination is:-
_A ”I) Whether appeal of the insurance
company requires to be aflowed or the claimants
are entitled for enhancement of compensation?”
2) What award’? M
5. Afler hearing the learned Counsel for .
perusing the records with zeference to the findin;_s1:fs;” 1 V’
by the ‘Tribunal, on the contentious poiinof af
loss of dependency, we hold that :7:
the compensation under the ‘lose ef “lat
Rs.7,68,0€)O/– on the basis of V1e»gV§Vfza.lV__e=r1:de1$ee’«2’1x{aiVlA;;r§ble on
record that hf;-liie” 3 Lche deceased
owned a pIiVE§t£’i.9 VV
6. ” Vfvizat the deceased was
working 1135 a Radio Technician for the
period on monthly salary of
V Rs.4,$§)0’f–, ‘mefifh addition to this salary he was
1-f,” ]’&e;-113?’ =5; sum of Rs.3,000f– by doing Radio
TectmiciaIi:’;§g{b per month he was earning a sum of
Rs.6,£)Q0[_~.’ of the said evidence on record it would
~ just pmpcr for us to take the monthly income of the
at Rs.5,0{)0/- per month, instead of Rs.6,000/– per
‘ taken by the tribunal on the basis of guess work. The
income of the deceased wouki be Rs.60,00{)/~
(R’s.5,()0(} X 12) after dexiztcting 11313 towards personal
V
reduced to Rs.6,77,1’70/~ with intacrcst at 6% M
from the date of pefition till thef flair ‘of ‘fly
modifying the impugned judgmcnt.
up the award in ttzrms of ‘TJ;ic
company is directed to deposit :fiinc1m.t;,’§ if any,
with the Tribunal, Withm The amount _
in deposit shall beam’ __nsfc:trIed facilitate the
claimants to yu§¢izqr;:§y%%vmci;gm¢. If)
§’§a’@.
Sd/-9
Iudg'ӎ