IN TFEE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
CIRCUIT BENCH AT SHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 17?” DAY OF MARCE, 2eo§f f%:.’
PRESENT
THE HoN’8:..E MKJUSTICVFE’K.»L¢MA¥Kf3′{}’4N:;§§3f}§.VV’
AND
Tag HOBFBLE MR. 3UST£€;:E-~.H.N. NA_GA_§1’i3H)i\f\I”*Sfi$’:
MESCELLANEQUS EQWST A.P.§5EAL'”§5£Q.§;1_;’1i/2G(§?(MV)
BETWEBQ:
Sm’ 3A:~aA;<:'~v%_ m '
W/C} LATE G 7RAMACHAN.§)RA
AGE 37 vEA;2s;c:<;c;seauTsx'r;ess
Ric: T0aAP;AeA;_g »
NGW R/AT_.AGAb1KER}1.. ..*
TQ AND DIST, :<ez–*=PAL. :APPELL£\¥xfT
A Vf(2»YVs§f:;%%¢;§;',a.;\;%mAs++s:<;s.R P mm, ADV.)
"mi-; Dséézsicrsm CGNTRQLLER APSRTC
ANAF3TA_5:PUR DIVISION
"AN4§\NT}fiPUR A P. :RESPONDE¥'3T
kfgav SRLSUNIL s. 955241 ma
M/Si. RAG ASSOCIATES, ADVS.)
MFA FILED U/5.173(1) 0? MV ACT AGAi:§I$'%f;?HE
IUDGMEM AND AWARD DATED 13/12/zoosPAss%E9+IIs1I._
MVC No.3o9/04 0»: THE FILE or: "{Mi~_<;E'~.._?'R?f_ES1DI'F~£Gé
GFFICER, ADDL MACT & FAST TRACK C*_Z}URT~.';_II :<mI,, ‘
PARTLY ALLOWING ms £:LAI_M’ “PETITICN’.,V_’V’EQR
C€)MP*ENSA’¥ION AND SEEKING 7. E’NH3X¥%¥§iEMF,N§I..,,_ {}if ”
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMINC§”I*§¥Vi FOR”~.§f)£~§Is§’IOI§I ‘rms
DAY, MANJL}%3ATH J., D.ELIV§RE£)vTH£_ FOLLGWIN3″: ~
Theugai liI3 *:¢d”férédmission, with the
consent O:f”v.Ij.h5E3V1§§3i:f§v§€$.’V’@{5U«–FI’S¥éi éififiearing for the parties,
the rfiatter is.’ ‘
2. ‘Thvis” ‘is by the claimant seeking
en,h.i§rIcement” _ce;’§Ipensatien awarded by the MACT,
I §<a ;;pa%£ ,IA.,%¢ajtea 13.12.2995 in we N530?/04. The
~aI§.pe§lé'rI§5$.__ffiisfiand by name 6. Ramachandra died in a
roééé t:v*éf.fic"'V'accident. He was running a hote£ at Toranga!
V. fiwwavy' 'Station. He was aged about 48 years. According
"'V£::c:I"t'tie appeiiant, her deceased husband was earning a sum
" "hf Rs.1S,0fi0/- per month. The "I"riburIa£, after considering
6/
the decurnents produced by the appellant
came to the conclusion that the deceasedjfiles'é?.Ll'nn;ne'
hetel in the Railway Station at
that the appellant — claimant c¥ie"–.n'et progzltéce'a'ny';ethe?=Ly
document, the Tribunal aéseseed tne_"'irt:orfi;e mo? the
deceased at R$.100,!t..g_erV-flglillvvt'censidefine the age
furnished in the érieln-Q that the
deceased wes'::.eg–ed the date of the
incident. the 'less of dependency'
at ef"'Re.1G,006/- wee awarded
towar§§.$ .Re.?,0GCl/- towares 'loss sf
censortiutmt Rs.V5'_l0t3%;t/%~*i'tewarc¥s 'mass to the estate' and
tov§ard—-s–~«'¥oss of lave and affecfion. In ail,
' ls awarded. Being not satisfied wlth the
C::.{fieerl$a1:Vt§':$l§' vewarded by the Tribunal, the present aepeal
is fEle::£.t*«:_ V
x 3.' The point to be considered by us in this appeal
" whether, the compensation awarded by the
Trleunal is just and proper and does it require
any enhancement? "'
(ff .
4. It is not in dispute that the appeiian’–:.V_j_rs._a4’_s-._not
prociuced a positive evidence in regard too”‘ti§e.i’L:’~:aTct:i_ei._
income of the deceased. 8ut,__:his_ Coortg’*~cenéi’ot”.V!oose”.:”‘–..
sight of the documents pro<:i.ucegi..:b)?'»._the" 'a";i;it:~eii'*a!,iju:t.
Admittedly, deceased was ' ' jruegiingii 'a ixhntei AVV*:fih'fl mR.eiiié:a–yi '
Station at Torangai. He haetifg..jr.a;orc§éc:et.i%'i%tnTe accident
has occurred while If he had no
sufficient income, have ourcheseo
a motorcy_cie 'He was aiso
maintei_nin*g..Vhisqnrife_'anVdv«rei'n_or Even on the date of
the e'c_cicient,V:tise-Ao:irvaoAes::"p.eyabie to an ordinary Coolie, is
not iessiiithwen day. Yherefore, income of a
heteiiieir c_annot"be___iAess than Rs.15fi/- per day even if it is
' Visccizsicivereeg-a's.._a smailest hotei in a place Eike Torangai that
. "t:o'o; ';"'7."n__e'e=.r"'Vti~;e Railway' Station where there is frequent
movefeent of generai public.
5. In the circumstances, we are énciined to assess
Vfthe income of the deceased at 9.3.150/– per day out of
‘which, }.[3”’ has to be deducted towards persona?
6/
expenses. Hence, the actual loss of income:«.._§ias’–to.V§;e
assessed at Rs.100/- per day, Rs.3,090/-‘Ft:_::persVV.:r€€'<$r2»ti§i.
Censtdering the age furnished in fihé 'drivi:'ig l.§céVn:e,.V wé eats '
not in a position to disturbthe find4inigi of
regard to tiie age of the decessed. 'i'hz9,:fefoi'e,VV"&si'é'héi've ts'
appiy the muitiptisr §a,s:h§ loss of
dependency has to 5;; in
adéition to is entitled for a
sum of .__t:i§_ei".§;cwr.'ventier:al heads since
this EM";-:i°:.'i'izg a sum of Rs.40,G00/-
towatds "'i_os's 'loss to the estate', 'less of
love and affe=:::tien._' ar;d'«'..f{zneral expenses'.
. tTi1e._._rasuit;the appeai is ailowed én part.
Vétfixpensation awarded by the Ttibunai is
efi4han.__;::e*d,i'«:""frorn Rs.3,15,_E)OB/~» to Rs.4,72,eo9/- with
..intei;est' @ 6% per annum from the date of the claim
ti 'AAV_V'pe':*.:.'it¥o:1 tit! the date of actuai payment.
Out of the enhanced compensation, 375% sf the
amount with preportionai mterest, sha%| be invested in a
KW'
fixed deposit in any nationaiised bank in thejeint
the appeiiant –~ ciaimant and her minor sen tm the
son attains the age of majerity, The ap:iél'a'nt««:_~ '}<;iai.mj:A-j r'§t_
is entitled to draw the perécdicai integest. A
Efigg
ma?'