IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGAJLORE
DATED TI"-{IS 'I'I~IE 2nd DAY OF DECEMBER,
:PRESENT: W'»'].'
THE IiON'BLE MR.JU§:f1¢E N.1.z:';1».éf1fv;:I§"':: 1'
THE HON'BLE 1\/IR.JUS'§':I_CEz
M.F.A.No. .2006
BETWEEN: V A '
Smt.Sannamma_,~* _ «V
W/0. L..5rt'e.'VKaris§iddaia,h, _
Aged'_ab0u*{"555 years-._ _ '
R/atCh'ikkétma1idy"-a,V"--._V. _
Ma11d.ya-.'fa,1L1k an.d D'1€t,riAct.
""" _..AP13<:-113111
{By S1fi.N .R.P1".3zfisi1';« .Ad~V.:Q'c:a1;e} j
AND: A
1. , -- » D.S.Kr'i.sh'negoW-tia.
~ ' SA/'0.Dyap't:gQwda,
Aged about 38 years,
-. _V .VS0nagé{1].: Viilage.
V * I31'si,riCt.
' 1vr;mr.1ya.;'
'Fl:1.e"I3:ranch Mzmagel'.
" O.t'::1e111:a1 Insurance Co. Ltd.
Opposite to KPTCL.
A E\/£.C.R0ad.
M ~ -{By S1"i..C.Shankar Reddy. Advocate for R2
' Mandya.
... Rc«:spc)11de111,s
R-1 served but unrepresented]
This MFA is filed U/S I73 {1} or MV Act" the
judgment and award dated: 09.11.2005 pElSS€;l"'--i_f1-ssii'1gid the '
road from Gurushree Theatre' "t'owa1*c1s E\é*'c:~nin";;;
College in MG Road, Mandya;V__ t:hat.v_-Jt'ime,iV
rnotoijcycle bearing No. KA. i--vi,?»..i{t.,586 <j:a.rVn'esij:r1 aiiraish and
negligent manner fro;'n_Myso'fe'* against
him, due to which,E'he"_.AA_'gti€:vous injuries.
Immediately} .. . H Ii/vlaridya General
Hospital stictéombed to the said
the of the deceased Sri.
Karisid"daial1_.V being the wife, has fiied a
(:Ia1'rI_1_ p'etiti_or1...I' befofe the Tribunal eiaiming
oi 75,000/W. The said claim petition
consideration before the Tribunal on
9. 1 Tribunal, after hearing bot.h sides and
"after assessing the oral and docrunientiary evidence, has
_a1_Eowed the said claim petition in part and awarded
Rs.I,97,860/-- as compensation under different
" V heads with interest. at 6% p.a., from the date of petition
3 V' the has lfi
till its realization. Being 21gg1*ieved by the said judginent
and award. the appellant has presented t:his'lé1§§;3e';al.
seeking enhancement: of Compensation.
4. We have heard the 1ear'fied« .eo'unse_l"appearing
for second respondent-- Insurance "Cvompei:;;y"a1'1d '-gone';
through the grounds the
appellant in the appealznaemof ‘A V
5. After perusal available on
record, passed by
the that, deceased Sri.
injuries sustained
by hirnlin occurred on 17.4.2003 at
aboutl.OOl4’p.na..v.a11<i". appellant being the wife of
_erre'd_l'-.ta.kiI1g the income of the deceased at
Rs.2…450O_./~.- _lper month for determining the loss of
ldeperideney and the same is inadequate and it: needs to
0' jli3e''eI1haneed, for the reason that. the accident. has
ll'"'v..C)_,(V?_(..'tlI'l'€3d in the year 2003 arid the Tribunal ought to
" «have taken just and reasonable aI'I1(}'i..lI1l'. as the income
[X
of the deceased. Therefore. we are of the c()ns1'_dered –
opinion that, if the income of the deceased V'1'.:1keI'i,at'
Rs.3,000/- per month, it would he just
Accordingly, we take the ineomeef at. '
Rs.3,OOO/A per month. The M1.1it.:Vpi1¢fof99fa.di<)p':;§:;»udhhyv.Vs
the Tribunal is just and (if the
deceased is taken 'Vr5'er'mehf§h aha out of
which, if 1/3m is %'id'e.dahieia::i his personal
expenses, comes to
Rs.2,000 of the deceased
is take'ri'"air and Multiplier of 'Q'
is ap1$i.i_&ed.'. of dependency comes to
Rs.2,_i_v6,OOa(},/5:' {2.,oo(j.x"'i2 x 9) instead of Rs.1,80,360/~
" " _Aand..aeeardiing1y, ivtwis awarded.
V Ifibunal has awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/–
toWards.~10_ss: eI'c0nsortiL1m; Rs.5,OOO/A towards funeral
ohsetiuies ceremony and Rs.2,500/– towards loss
A esirate. The said amount awarded by the Tribimal is
iriaciequate and it needs to be enhanced. 'Therefore, we
V deem it fit to award a sum of Rs.10.000/- towards loss
-5,
of consortium; Rs..10,000/~ towards 1:r2111sp1’t,21t.iQ_11 and
funeral expenses and Rs.10,000/– tow;-u’ds ioss
7. A sum of Rs.5,000/– awarded
towards the medical expenses is _i_u..s1._aI1d.’i”eas’Oh;iiab}E~and”it
does not call for interference.
8. Having regard to the[_f'”a–r;is arid ci1*c:u1i1vsta,_h’ce.s bf the’. V
case as stated above, the in1pL1’g.(1ed_V judg;n1eV1f;t aéld award
passed by the T1’ibL1i1z:.I_z:” is ‘.;._ia!;:::-j_I’e.1.{i;.Vjbe”m0di£’ied. The total}
compensation payab1evAe~a;;§3§3.s / W and
the break~ isfals. fellows:
. Tows.1jds”w~.lt:);::s:.;QfV Rs.2, 16.000/’
1
2. T0WVa1’ds–1.o7ss 0″f1eon’sQrtiun3 Rs. _10,000/ W
3. Towards 1o’s’e~.”0f es_tétte*~.. ‘ ‘ Rs. 10,000/~
4. Toxvards tra-ns’];\:(j)~rt’2,1’ti&dn. and
F’une1’a]aeXpef1se’s. ” . Rs. 10,000/W
F3′
TQwards”n}ed3’ea1 ‘e-xpe11ses Rs. 5zOOO[w
Total Rs.2,51,000/–
the appeal is ailowed in part and
judgment. and .2m»’a1″d passed by the
J”–~.__”-»C1aimévTi-ibunal in MVC No.1994/2005 stands modified,
T”‘gre1.I1t_.;:.i1g a compensation of Rs.2,51,000/~ instead of
(enhancement being Rs.53.140/-J. The
enhanced Comperlsation shall carry irltierest. at 6% {_).;-1.,_, from
the date ofpeieition till its 1*ea11’zat.i0n.
The second respondent~Insurance C(.}1:n;)2;1Aiiy~:” ‘
directed to deposit the enhanced c:oVn1jp»ensa?.iE)n” “e2,f}1oLi’r19{ witlfl VV
interest, within six weeks from i11e’».§ia1.:e”o:f’ret:eipt_ bf
0f1,h1’sjud_gment and award.
Out of the enhanced a
sum of Rs.25,00()/- shail be
invested in 31?, I*’ixff’C,].»._ 1iri “.e_ng*;_””r1arionz11ized or
scheduled eel” for 21 period of
five Years. to withtflraw the
ii1{€If€SjL _ on: V V V
“fee ” 4. of R328. 140/~ with
pr0p01ft.i011ai’eV ii1te;’estA”v_s}Vi-fill be releaseci in favour of the
i.n1meei’i’-ateiy, on deposit. by the h’1s1,1.ra11ce
Draw Jere. award. acc:01’di11gly. ,
sd/~
EUDGE
V ‘ ma” 3 25%