Mrs Alice Varkey vs United India Insurance Co Ltd on 25 October, 2010

\\>'§

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 257" DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010.

: PRESENT :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. PAif1*1'L5;~..f ft  _

AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE  «  1'

M.F.A.NO. 6973 or '2o_( )5  . .  "

Between:

Mrs. Alice Varkey, __ . .
W/0. Late 1\/LEVI. Varkey,' '  '
Age: 54 years, "  .
R/ at. S.M. 598/3,__ 791 :Cafn'p.§
Jalahalli East'  '  2: 
Banga10re__~l4«.4' if '

(By Sri, %
Sn'. Easavaraj..R.M;afl-X,' ~~F~,,¢.c'1\,voeaetes]

A_r1_<i.; - _

.  "'*I}nifed"Endia Inéinanee Co., Ltd,

.YesVhwanV1§hapur,

  

"By itshixifiesional Manager.

2. . Ms.""vS. iieepika.
D '/'.r_)__. Sukurnar,

 " * «Aged aboui 26 years,
2  Fri/0. N0. 853, 21%' Cross,

Ayyappa Nagar,
J alahalli,
Bangalore.

... Appellant



8. Vinod Varkey
S/0. Late M.M. Varkey,
Age: 33 years.

4. Miss. Vidhu Varkey
D/o. Late M.M.Varkey,
Age: 29 years.

Respondent No. 3 & 4 are

Residing at SM 598 / 3,

7*" Camp, Jalahalli East,    --_ H .. g  .
BangaIore--14.   j.  " " 

A.' Respondentjs

{By Sri. S.Srishaila, Advocaagicr R1  V

R2 to R4 notice dispensed .v/o dated :18'/07.l/E2006}

This MFA is filed U/S.'vI73[}"}~.vbf.:VVl'2/EV: Act against the
Judgment and_Award.d'ated'ig 04 103/ 2005"=passed in MVC No.
3678/2003 ;0n*;tpl_'.ie file of~~th'e  SCJ and MACT,
Bangalore .-{SCCil§_--_--?_ 7'},_pai*tiy aiitjfimng the claim petition for
compensation and 's-eekifig enhancement of compensation.

This * MFA V. on for Hearing, this day,
N.K_. _PATIi~.~.  d'eiiv~:~_:red the following:
*"* JUDGMENT eeeee

it  --  is filed by one of claimants challenging

the  judgment and award dated 4th March

 n2o05,..'passed in M.V.C.No.3678/2003, by the XIX

 --..Vi-'\d.lditiona1 SCJ and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,

-IlBanga1ore (SCCH~»17), (for short, Tribunal' ) for

enhancement of cornpe sation on the ground that, the



compensation of '<'5,8i,OOO/-- awarded as against their

Claim for ?16.00 lakhs, is inadequate.

2. The facts in brief are that, the 

the wife of the deceased Late Sri.  V'

their children, who are respondientiséyfi  it

filed the claim petition under Section 

Vehicles Act, contending    on 17-
05-2003, the deceased  proceeding on

his bicycle to his house :after  his duty from

Airfoirce'Trainirig"'C'si1ege,tifaiahalii West. When the

bicycie yvas the extreme left side of SM.

Road, near V_V'Fa,thi:A1'i_aV"Church, a car bearing N0.KA -

  peing""dVriven by its driver, in a rash and

   Rdnianner, came from behind and dashed

against~ thheddbicycle of the deceased. Due to the impact,

 the tudeceased sustained grievous injuries and

  V'si1c'curnbed to the same in Command Hospital at 6:45

d V .I%A.M. on the same da
'_____W_,__,_,,,....



3. It is the case of the appellant that, the
deceased was aged about 57 years, working as Warrant
Officer in Indian Air Force at Airforce Technical.g'C--ollege

and drawing salary of ?14,776/-- per 

income tax assessee. It is her further.c'ase:.A_1that.,." 

account of his untimely death,  it

haywire and she has lostgthe 'life'*partne1f.. 

security and therefore,  to"-ldedcompensated
adequately.

  of the deceased in the
accident,<_the  her two children, who are

respondents" 3_'and_ Véfdlherein, filed the claim petition

 Ab'ei;or§,,th;'e,_Trihun'alV seeking compensation of a sum of

  the respondents 1 and 2 herein.

'I'h__e saiddijclaim petition had come up for consideration

 pp before. the Tribunal on 4% March 2005. The Tribunal,

' --..V"aft.eir considering the relevant material available on file

Rand after appreciation of the oral and documentary

evidence, allowed the 'm petition in part, awarding a
WWW".

I'
!



sum of ?'5,81,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from
the date of petition till the date of deposit. Being
aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by

the Tribunal, on the ground that is

inadequate, the appellant is in appeal   

seeking enhancement of cornpe1nsatio1_;7.."'.gg '1 he ' V t

5. We have heard  coi1ns_ueIv':foi;';appellant

and learned counsel" for ;_Insu_1*a'r1-be Company, for

considerable length of ti1ne.' - _  'l "

 *  counsel for the parties
and afteiapherulsaltl judgment and award passed by

 ir1cl'uding' the original records placed before

' ,.1,1sV,. _ weof the View that, the occurrence of accident

 thev'vls:ife.sultant death of the deceased are not in

 dispute. It is also not in dispute that he was aged about

 v$7"_«years and working as Warrant Officer at Airforce

 __'?'i'echnical College, drawing salary of ?l4,'/"76/-- per

month or ?1,'77,312%,,per annum. Out of which,

:'~"'"'°""""'"M'w'm"
t



professional tax and income tax are to be deducted.
Accordingly. if a total sum of ?l8.200/-- is deducted
under the said heads, the net income comes to

31,59,112/-- per annum. The app1'0p1'iat_e..__lintill£l1;lliiE1'

applicable. having regard to the age of  

'9' as per Sarla VerIna's case'-4.'  'regard '4

number of dependents, 1V,xs"3fd 

deducted from ?I,59,ll§'/El' and lithe said
deduction, it comes annum. In the

light of the well settledv:.law'V--1ai,d  this Court, in

the pcaseagsc  Iiiiiiaill and others Vs. K.S.

LaksliIni«. reported in ILR 2000

Ka1;'.3800';" lVoss_iofA'dependency, in this case has to be

  atbylladopting split multiplier. Accordingly,

   deceased was left with another three years of

ser__'lVic_e,~  multiplier of '3' has to be applied for a sum

 of ?i,.o6,075/--, which comes to ?3,18,225/-- and

 uptheireafter, after deducting 50% from "('l,06,075/-,

 '' Nlmultiplier of '6' has to be adopted, which comes to

?'3,l8,225/--. Accordinélgflthe total loss of dependency
[I ##2##



works out to 33,18,225/- (i.e. 31,06,075/--~ X'3'} plus
33,18,225/- (i.e. ?1,06,075/~ x'6'], which comes to
?6,36,450/-- as against ?5,56,000/-- awarded by

Tribunal.

7. Further, the Tribunal   T

sum of ?10,000/-- towards' loss of

 not awarding reasonabievv.borriperisatiori tinder the
other conventional   The""~deceased has left

behind his Wi.f_e   having

regard   cirourristances of the case, we
awardra .si1n'r -- towards loss of love and

affeotionf s'urr1',=of"? 101000/-- towards transportation of

  afibody arid' """ 'funeral expenses; and a sum of

  V'towards loss of life expeotancy/ loss of estate

 the compensation of ?15,000/~ awarded by

 xTribtmal towards funeral expenses and loss of estate.

8. In the light of the facts and circumstances of

the case, as stated abo\%t;'1e appeal filed by appellants
If fl

{



is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award
dated 4th March 2005, passed in M.V.C.No.3678/2003,
by the XIX Additional SCJ and Motor Accident.g"Clgaims

Tribunal, Bangalore [SCCH--17], is 

awarding a sum of ?"6,81,450/-- as  

awarded by the Tribunal, with    it

on the enhanced sum, fro1n_the«'d_at'e of  thjeg

date of realization. The brealefupp is  follows;

Towards Loss of Dep;eriden_cy,- .A  "  ' 6,363,450/~

15,000/--

3
Towards Loss of love and affection  f it 1
 ' 10,000/ -

Towards Lossof esteatejj/'-loss' of V
expectancy,   V  ~  

Towards loss of'con~s'ortirin1  3  V 10,000 /-

Towards  transportation  dead 10,000 / --

body  funei*al exp'e:1se's.__

' T()fI"_AL__.  A 2* 6.81,45o/-

  Insi1ra.nc,e-- Company is directed to deposit the

' ,eriha,nc'ed'«compensation of ?1,00,450/-, with interest

t.he*reon  6% per annum, within four weeks from the

 date~.oi"§"eceipt of copy of the judgment and award.

A  Immediately on such deposit by the Insurance

Company, out of enhanced compensation of



31,00,450/~, 50% of it with proportionate interest, shall
be invested in Fixed Deposit, in any Nationalized or
Scheduled Bank, in the name of the appellant --'<':'\?iIife of

deceased, for a period of three years, reinewabiei for

another three years. with liberty reserved   

withdraw the interest periodically,  f} 

Remaining 50% of .enhanee::_1"'compe'neation'§ 

proportionate interest, sha11Kbepre1ease'dsfaviour of the
appellant, immediate*1§E,." _ 
Office to draw   

 .....  

Iudgé

sax-
fudge