IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGPQTQORE
DATED THIS THE 4m DAY OF NOVEMBER "
PRESENT:
THE HONBLE MR.JUs*1*IC'£:« E.
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTIC§*~K_N_I{ES.HAVANAf§AYANA 1'
M.;«*,.A,No.s95D.}j2005 (Mi?)
BETWEEN:
1. A.R.ARUNAC;1ALA;\}1"""1'j: _ -
S/O c.T.;s.A;E:U1\IAc:HAE1".A" M"
AGED§.ABvQU-1',
2. Av,:R.CHTTO'i'AI.D;V_T", = A
W'/_o " '
AGED 48 YEARS' _ "
BOTH ARE RES'IE5INC} AT
1 177, 3RD ZV'1AiN__.. 3&9 STAGE.
' A - D V13L'«ML'D:*:XT£;Ns1oN,
A RAJA=RA.SHW'A_R1NAGAR
5DAN:3A1,QR;:,V_V.~ APPELLANTS
T(13.;,} SMT.:I"3£;.V:KALPANA & SRI.A.S.SHIVA RQEZDDY, ADVS.)
" AND
A 1'. 'AAJENDHRA. 3/o RAMASWAMY
ANJANAPURA POST
BANALORE NORTH TALUK
22" THE MANAGER,
M/S. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
IO
I ML BUILDING, NO221
CABBON PET MAIN ROAD,
BANALORE ... RESI>OND'EN.TSL. " ~ _
(By SRI.K.K.VASANTH. ADV. FOR R~2.
NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH.)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.17"I§('1'}'«QF".¢MV AC'r1AGAIN'ST'i'. A'
THE JUDGMENT &: AWARD DA'i'ED1'_A_1ta'/ 1 t/EOCS'
MVC.NO.1608/2004 ON '.:'II-E IrILE,_ "OE TI{1E.,4:AI_3rH
JUDGE es: MEMBER, MACTAVCOURTV"O1=**S.ivIAL~L "CAUSES,
METROPOLITAN AREA. BANG-ALORI;, pA'RI'L¥v":ALLOw1NG
THE CLAIM PETITIOMFOR COMEENSIAETON & SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF C,OI§/I1?EN%SI:xfr1-ON.'
TEISVvI§{I,.I«j.A;,VV'COI»:r.I'NG ONFOR ADMISSION THIS DAY.
N.K.PATIL, J... FOLLOWING:
u %V'hM§UDGMENT
.vv_v'1".hiS"'appeaI is directed against the judgment and
A * gttvaa S 13.1.2006 passed in M.V.C.NO.16O8/2004
On ..t'h.e.Vt"iIe Of the Member, Motor Accident Claims
i T1-";'buna1~IV, Bangalore ('Tribunal for brevity), On the
ground that, the compensation Of RS.2,10,00O/~
awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum,
is inadequate and requires enhancement.
AL
/
E/I
4
Rs.10,00,000/-- against the respondents. The said
claim petition had come up for consideration before the
Tribunal on 13.1.2006.
3. The Tribunal, after hearing the
on both sides and after consideririg ~:t«_orall” and 7.
documentary evidence available’ –. on. record , iallowiedv i the
claim petition in part anVd.,lp:.awarde(i_ lcolmplenslation ot
Rs.2,10,000/w withliinterelst bf?/<,ivlA'p.er from the
date of petition deposit. Being
dissatisfied of compensation awarded
by appellants have presented this
appeal on t1'1e..___._gr~ound that the said compensation
' .-laWarvded_"-by'—-.the Tribunal, is inadequate and requires
it by modifying the judgment and award of
t.he~~lribfinal.
The learned counsel for the appellants at the
“ouitset submitted that the Tribunal committed error in
taking the notional income of the deceased at
5
Rs.E5.000/- per annum, without taking into
consideration the fact that he was a student in
the 3″‘ year Diploma in Mechanical
was on the fag end of the Diploma in
couple of months or after Coinp1.etion,ff”hVe
earned not less than –A}’3er moIith._faI1d’V:wou1dfi
have taken care ofghis gagedg’-iiarentstj*~Therefore. he
submits that the ‘i’ribuna1.i7′ taken the
monthly Rs.5,000/– and
qua:ntified” Further, he submits
that Committed error in not awarding
ju_s’t~ and.’ reasonable compensation towards loss of
gtransportation of dead body and funeral
‘e:q:ievn.fseVs ffa..1*1d also erred in not awarding any
oomperisation towards loss of love and affection.
A. Therefore, he sought for modifying the judgment and
‘award of the Tribunal by awarding just and reasonable
‘ compensation.
6
5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the second
respondent «M» Insurance Company substantiated’ the
judgment and award passed by the ‘l’ribiin_a’_l”a’s
reasonable and contended that the sarriie”is.:’pasise’d
due consideration of the Ii*iater’ial 0._r1’~ lreccfdp ‘and .
therefore, it does not callfor-. .interfere11ce’bjI:itl1i.smCourt.–dc L’
6. We have heard lV’:lea1’ned léotiriselii appearing
on both sides.
7. _careful’vcvonsidelration of the submissions
of “o1’1. both sides and after thorough
evaluation the oriéinai records available on file, the
« .por1l_V”p:oint«cthat arise for our consideration is,
iAV.ivWI1ether the compensation awarded by
‘ribumizl isjust and reasonable?
it The undisputed facts of the case are that on
lghaccount of the injuries sustained in the accident,
deceased Laxman son of the appeliants herein
succumbed to the same enroute to the Hospital. On
flee
{
“,3
perusal of the original records. it is noticed that the
deceased Laxman was studying in the 3″‘ yea1=.§)«§_,i_)’loma
in Mechanical Engineering and within a s_l’£ortAlperiod——he.g
would have started earning. T _here_fore’, .re,gari;¥_to’ _ it
educational qualification of
age, We deem it fit to accepivtihe income t’h’e”‘de’ceasedl
at Rs.4,000/– per month.Afl’he’g_:deCe_ased\,v,:2.s,,,; bachelor.
Therefore, out of Rs,4l,QOOo,/<ll1',,:if fdeld-uct 50% towards
personal e:x:.peri-Sesi, of t§rie..,Vd~e'c.eVase:d, the net income
corries Having regard to the
age the' the younger parent, the
agipropriate-.Vrriultiiaiier applicable is 'l3'. Therefore, we
R-:..,,s.i2,ooo/» (Rs.2,000/~ x 12 x 13) towards
as against Rs.l,95,000/– awarded
by th_e'Tribunal.
Further, the Tribunal has committed error in
‘awarding only Rs. 10,000/- towards loss_ of estate, which
is on the lower side. Therefore, we award Rs.20,000/«
1
X
8
towards loss of estate as against Rs.10,000/– awarded
by the Tribunal.
10. The Tribunal has further
not awarding any compensation towards Io_ss_ of.io_Ve..A and 7
affection. Having regard ,to.__the that’the.’:4ap};i};31iantsi,
have lost their son, we deedrriit fit to 10,000/~–
towards loss of love _
ll. TheA—error in awarding
oniyi transportation of dead body
and Aftineral is on the lower side.
Ha’v’ving regard “‘to”exTpenses, we deem it fit to award
~ towards transportation of dead body and
as against Rs.5,000/~ awarded by the
‘1″ribi1na]
For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is
dalljowed in part. The impugned judgment and dated
T 13.1.2008 passed in M.V.C.No.1608/2004 on the fiie of
the Member. Motor Accident Claims ‘I’ribuna1–IV,
9
Bangalore is hereby modified by awarding compensation
of Rs.3,52,000/– as against Rs.2,10,000/~ awai+;ie.d by
the Tribunal. The enhanced cornpenlsatien
Rs.1,-42,000/– shall carry int_ere,st at”l6<3/a:'_'per'i
from the date of petition till of
break up is as under:
1. Towards loss of d.ependencyv-. Rsv..3,1..2,000–OO
2. Towards loss of ‘esta.te _ V » Rs. 20,000–0O
3. Towards loss of lov’e.a:i’d__afiectio_nVVl Rs. 10,000–00
4. Towards transpor_tai;iori of: l V ” ..
dead bodyT&_furLera1’expenTses T ” Rs. 10,000-00
_ _ E Rs..3,52,000–OO
The sec[ond._resp’ond’ent – Insurance Company is
directeVC1.__<tC_ dlepo'sit..the enhanced compensation with
inte'r'est_,____within a period of four weeks from the
' .receipt of copy of the judgment.
vO.iit the enhanced compensation, a sum of
– with proportionate interest shall be kept in
Deposit in the name of the second appellant in
any Nationaiised or Scheduled Bank, for a period of 5
years and renewable by another 5 years and she is
4/KM…
,3
K
E
L
ll)
permitted to Withdraw the interest accrued .t”l”aereon,
quarterly.
Further, a sum of Rs.2(),()0O/~
interest shall be released of V
appellant immediately o;i_4_depo*s_it”- by the ilnsigirances
Company.
Further, a s1l1’1*n7o.f with proportionate
interest shallybe released’ first appellant
immediately” by tile’ Insnrance Company.
A’Qffi<:ye "tolldraw the award accordingly.
;; aaaaa sd/..
JUDGE
Sd/..
JUDGE
RS/