Sri Munivenkatappa vs Reliance General Insurance Co Ltd on 25 May, 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THiS THE 25" DAY OF MAY 2011 

BEFORE

THE HC)N'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.  T   

MESCELLANEGUS FERST APPEAL Noi;_.87:};.S{2(u)'39:4{F\r'i§'4)--..'~._  ,,. }

C/W _
8475/2oo9mv)V%%

BETWEEN   -- 
MFA NO..__8_'f7'_1E:[_ 2gg_,g  _

1. Sri Munivenkatappa,   '
S/0 Madanagiriyappa, 1
Age: 57 years.

2. Smti Lakshmam'r{1a,*ii._ 

W/0 Munivenkata-p.§2Aa';~~%_ 

Age: 52 years; "

Both are resident of So'EE.amjra \/-'~i_{_i:age,
Soiiapura Hobii, A'n._eka_E Taiufié, " _ 
Bangaiore Dktrict.  _     Appetlants

(By'f§Vri'vRanfékhianarg R I\'!"3iE72 years;



 gellapura Haste,' 
'v.__An'ekal Taluk, _ ._
"aangafere Ru.ra"l,Sisl:rict.

 Age': 6? _year::,
A V  'F3: Misnlswarnyf
  §{ie'----E\1e§33, Thevele Street,
 V ..§l§3'§ra;'::f:2ap:;r§ Tavern;

lix)

Resp'en'cEents-.
R/at No.33, Thavelu Street,  " :. 
Kumaraswamypete,
Dharmepuri Town,
Dharrnpuri District,
Tamulnaciu State.

(By Sri H S Lingarejg Adv" for R-1)

(R~2 notice dispensed with) " _  
MFA N0,8475g'2e.Q<39,
BETWEEN H  
Reliance General insurance CG.-.._L"Ld,, 
Regional Office, No.28, 5" Flcxorg' _ V V
Centenary Building, V   ' ~

M G Rgam     2   I = Appellant
Bangalore-560 001.      "   

By its General Mana'g'e.r__.  " ' "    ' »

(By Sri H S LEnvga.raj;"r€\:r3v:;1;:;fQ_r  

1. Munivenkaté';)pa., V

Age:57 years,  » = 
S/0 Sri Madanagiriy'e.ppva.V 

2' Lakshmarnma, , 
Age-:52 ye.3r"5,    ..... 
W/lo._Mu'n§velnka'i:ep;ja.A_

Both ere" rg'-at l'Sv=:§'l"EVavr"m  Rf; ilage,

3-.._R fij'1e»§<rEs;:§*man",



5.»)

Dhermapuri District,    
Tamil Nadu.    A  E?.es';:,~t;nfci'er':ts

(By Sri Ramaehandre R Naik, Adv', for R~1i':aVn:pe_n;<;es, ?5,000/- towards funerai expenses,

 iove and affection and €'13,.2QO/-- tewards

i*ie"s';e' ef estate; Tin'e.r3e~fere; he prays that the compensatieri may be
r"ei:¥uCed. "

  T5'.x._é'e,_tfn'e Eight of the arguments addreeseci by the iearned

it  C'eé;ee;eViV fer the parties? the erziy peint that arises fer ztensifieratien





%n§iii»ioi.iie: 'mi is sppiiiaoio for the age gfoup of §82'S§i"iS between

Whether' the compensation awarcied by 

Tribunal is in-adequate ?

6. My answer' to the above point is ..n'e2_gativié'-f;:.{fV *:i Ve 

foliowing reasons: T.     .
Since the Ciaim petition came 'to'--igite fiiiedvby_ti'h_ve vwgiaimaints

under Section 163A of the Act, whiie cofiiiiéiting the '--€ioVn1pVé?nsation
payabie in favour of the Con'd'LiSicj:hoduie to Section

163A of the Act shat! be foI1ow::~§i.;:VVT'h.s;1.ofiri1i'b;:ij';;i:,'-has fixed the

income of the deceasoo  deducted 1/3"'
of the amount  appiied muitipiier
'l1' and 

(i) Loss of dé'pe_,§nd.e.Vnc§¥'. V .
{§:§,OOQ/~x12x1.1V) _ 2,64,000~OO

 '{.ii)'.' vC'o;7\§'Ae~§fa-nvifgev expenses 3,000~0O
(mi , "?9.onéi'é'i'_'voxoioifiises 5,000-goo

 "A on Loss ofiioiée and affection 4o,ooo--oo
~  «..i_~g::.., LosSoi7~ estate 13;2oo~oo

Totai 3,25,2{}{}~€iQ

"i.V%':'~;'i{§;_;_o§*:'iir:i;; io Second Scneooie to Seotion 3.532% of the A92,



6

15 and 20. According to the Second Schedule 163A of the Act; the

ciaéments are entitéed for compensation as under:

{in 3)

(i) Loss ef dependency

{e2,eo0;~x12x16) _3.;.84%,0e:3¥dQee 57;  '

{E0 Loss of estate  

(em F-'unerai expenses  "'e2,t53VQ--e§"  

Total  
Less: C0mpensatior:"'a.yvard~ed *    
by the Tribunat ' '  v

Additéohakcompensatievh. _ 

Thus, the ciaimante a&'ié;§Ven£i:ied":.i?e.r 'ahddffgidnai compensation of

?'63,300/~.

in viewpf the-» :a'boy'e,AA':he*~*"»LAppeaI flied by the insurance

Comgjahy i;e:tc..e_be Cheri".--§;*3--sed.

  8. ih.{:he res{§jé':§;V..e1£he Appsezfi in MFA No,8?15/2009 is partéy

_a_E¥h.:mfe'cj, hoiehrzgvfihyat the appeiiahtsfclaimants are entitled fer

jazjd§£:4ie"hea§xce":33;::e'nsatEcsh of €'63,300fx along with costs and interest
ruafge' He'? §% $6?" ahhum frem the ciate ef ?etii:%9n til!

.""'VTg"ee§§s*ei§e';i ;$£'{iGE'§§§'?g§y1 the Empasgrzeé guégmeht am aware are

my Kr.)  a .



K3

madified. Respondent No.1/insurance Company is direct<s'é;»i.if'-.TtQ

deposit the additional campensation amount aiong

interest with the Trébunaé within three months {mm

additianai compensation amount aiong wéthfkjfits and i.;s*.€:.é ‘réstVs?i*a!E

be apportioned amcmgst the cfaimantsequaA:i§§.{. ‘-_

The Appeai filed by vthg insVurV& r jcéV”‘-»L.§omffiany MFA
No.82?/’5/2009 fails and the saméis.T_E*1’eFeEi3}::’di§h§.is§:éd,.

No casts’ w »
The Registry i:;_Vdi,r_e’g:ted–‘r;0_t–r;{mspoVrt the statutory amount in

MFA No;8475/2§Z?VC)§ Vté3A fife; ct§i’.€.§’bVL:V’rsement.

Sifé
EUQGEE

‘agg