Sri Narase Gowda vs Sri D N Keshava S/O Sri Narase Gowda on 23 October, 2010

IN1}HBHflHKCOURTCHTKARNKDMUXATBANGALORE

TI-IE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE B.sREENIw§LSE

1.

 1.

DATED THIS THE 233-13 DAY OF OCTOBER. 2010

BEFORE

Miscellaneous First Ap*pea1_1§Io__. 88_4"'Of-  " . 

BETWEEN

Sri. Narase Gowda,  "  V _ 
S/0. Sri. I-Iuchahanurxiarithaiah;-_  -- "

Aged about 53,--years',--~---- _  

Smt. Sarojalnméi, T' V  _ 
W/ 0. Sri._ Narase.._G0w'da,._ ' "
Aged _abQ_u'{". ééfiyears. . " "
Bdih s;;1efres.;ding..at--NL1.345., A
6th Ma':En;.;_.1St(31'0ss'. ~ T 

1  riear  Mffirk '  .E;ngiis_'h"STch001,
 Bhuvari-3shvJa1'inagar,~

"Dasaraha11jg,.  __  
B"aI}ga10r'e_ --" .57 T « 

 Appellants

 _  Srl. K. T. Gurudeva Prasad and
  , ' Sathyapal, Advs.]

T'  

" _ Sn. D. N. Keshava,

S/0. Sn. Narase Gowda,

Major, residing at N0.345,

831 Main, 1st Cross,

near St. Marks Enghsh School,
Bhuvaneshwarmagar,

Dasarahafli,



Bangalore -- 57.

2. ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Prestige Carniche,
No.62/ 1, 2nd Floor, Richmond Road,
Bangalore -«~ 27,
By its Manager.

  Responde_¢nts.._V

[By Sri. A. N. Krishna  Adv..;   
R. 1 is served and unre1:_y'rcs'encted}  "  

This MFA is filed"U/S. 173(1) of  --'against
the Judgement and awarddated O9.._1'1.-200'? passed in
MVC No.8584/200.6 on the filelof14thlAd.ditional Judge,
Court of Small 'C_a1.1se.s,  MACT, Bangalore,
SCCH--10, partly 'alloWi1d§g:»' the "claim petition for
compensation and,,._  seeking: l"'V-'enhancement for
eompensa.ti011;~v_ B  .  ' 

  Hearing, this day, the
Court ,_ delivered' the fQ_1_l0_Wing:

°QflgfiDGMENT

4;' " r..'I'his"»E115p'ealll'is"by the claimants for enhancement

it  e , jglof conioensation awarded by the Tribunal.
  _ l'  _Hea;_-d.."

he 3%. . .Foi1_'t:he sake of convenience parties are referred to

as'~th'ey are referred to in the claim petition before the

it if V.  Tribunal.



4. Brief facts of the case are:
That on 17-9-06, when the deceased Prashanth

was travelling in a car bearing registration 

MB--1558 on Tumkur - Bangalore road,__Aii--earf

gate, the driver of the car drove the sai'nefviri:..high  * , 

in a rash and negligent m=:.m>.~er'i and" cause'd._xfthe

accident. As a result, the d_e'eeased  s'nst'ain.eti"g1'ievousf

injuries and died ongthe 'parents. filed a claim
petition before  Bfarigalore, seeking
compensationgitaf / V:V'I'he Tribunal by
impugned   award has awarded
 with interest at 6% p.a.
 of compensation awarded by

 Tril:'>nnVai'Vthe"- clairnants are in appeal seeking

 . _ enharicement of compensation.

  .'Efs'j__thVere is no dispute regarding death of the

deceased Prashanth in a road traffic accident, and

3" x:_li'abi1ity of the insurer of the car, only point remains for

my consideration in the appeal is:



Whether the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
just and proper or does it call for
enhancement?

6. After hearing the learned Counsel for the-Vipartiées

and perusing the award of the Tribuna1',.n:I  

View that the compensation a\;v'ardedp_b-:y thefiTT1'iburiai'--wisV 9 j 

not just and proper, it is on the4'1o\}ver sideand 'therefore

it is deserved to be enhanced:

7. Claimants   oi "thet: deceased,
except examining  .-~thejV_d»e_ceased as P.W. 1
and Area  iof   the deceased
wash'   I has produced salary
certificate    at Ex.P.23, have not

es§tabiicshed' " «employment of the deceased by

 'relevant documents or examining the

"  Vohfiivthe deceased. It is to be noted, claimants

hiayeflg stated, the deceased was getting salary of

  ;Rs.1"1,000/-- by working as a Computer operator. But

 according to the salary certificate Ex. 13.23 produced by

P.W.6 working as an Area Manager in the company

3:



where the deceased was Working, his salary was
Rs.8,000/-- pm. The Tribunal rightly disbelieving the
salary of the deceased, Considering his age as 2?.-_years,

year of accident as 2006 and nature of  a

Computer Operator, has assessed his" ii"_1cof11."ee~ 

Rs.6,000/' per month. It has" dedyudcteti:A§S€1%_"of his 7 it

income towards his personal 'expenses bwlrfich i'-.3b'a1's0

just and proper. Mu1tip1ier'e«.ofi 713' has 'to."'be.°app1ied on
the basis of the age 'of  thebdeceased. So
loss of dependency!'   Rs.4,68,000/--

[Rs.6,000/§' 5.; x." it is awarded as

  by the Tribunal.
8.   by the T ribunal towards

transportatioirof dead. body and funerai expenses and

d it  «Ros. 1§5';00't0-- awarded towards loss of estate are just and

    do not require enhancement.
'Bx.' Rs'.~5;,U00/~ awarded towards loss of love and

affection is on the lower side and it is deserved to be

 '.enfi;anced, and 1 award Rs. 15,000/-- under this head.

$2"



10. Thus the claimants are entitled for the following

compensation:

1. Loss of dependency f

2. Loss of love and affection Rs?"   

3. Loss of estate    A    ll ' 

4. Transportation of dead'l'bo:tlyl' 

and funeral expenses  P,»s;7 .. 

ma l  e§§F[os,ooo/--

11. Accordingly the    in part and the
judgment  is modified to the

extent stated _pherei.n"a]ooVe,:Aa- if

 The  entitled to a total compensation
of  Rs.4,62,000/-- awarded by

ribunla1;,,.___and Compensation awarded by the

' enhanced by a sum of Rs/16,000 / --, with

  6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till

thevdate of realisation.

  Respondent -- Insurance Co. is directed to deposit

the enhanced compensation amount with interest

Q!’

within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of

the judgment.

14. Out of the enhanced compensation

with proportionate interest is ordered

FID. in any nationalised/schecluteéd

in the name of the claimant No’;?, Pm whofis n;¢tru.e1–%

of the deceased for a perio~d’o_f nirieand the
remaining amount.__..’:%Wit;h 1-p,ro~p_o_rtio_nate interest is
ordered to be,_re1ease–d.in. favourbfv the ciaimants

in equal V.

“No”o1″:d_eI” ‘costs. V

A vmgnt ‘V ”