IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 31") DAY OF NOVEMBER. 2010
BEFORE
THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASI£
Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 9404 of
BETWEEN
1. Mrs Valiarmathi,
W/0. Late Sandanam»;
Aged about 31 Years,
2. Miss. Gowtha1r<i~..V_ .
D/0. Late Sandan?am¥_ V
Aged about 16 Years. "
3. Miss. E1a'e§ai'si, _
D/o_.. »I;aa:ei'S_andan_ai1} .. .,
Aged _ abhdglt 14 Year;
4. 1'/Iastef " * « A
S / I;1te'Sa11da1jI;31n
. - Aged "abQut7' 1 3 'Years.
' 'I ' . . . . .
-- T Late Sandanam
A about 12 Years.
].\_g*I1*s,: «firpadamma
~ W;/0. K C Yeiumalai
Aged about 71 Years.
A All The appellants are
R/at N0. 3/4'7, ,
Near Chowdeshwari Temple,
Lingarajapuram,
St. Thomas Tovxm Post.
Bangalore -~ 560 084.
(Since 2nd to 591 appellants are
minor represented by natural guardian
their mother Mrs. Vallarmathi)
Avppellants
(By Sri. M R Kumaraswamy, Adv.)
A__N_§
1. Mr. G Narashima ,
R/at No.40, I-Iarsha Layoutt__
Subbayana Palya ' '
Banasawadi
Bangalore -- 560 033.
2. The United Indialinsurancielé
No.24, lst floor " . 1 V
Classic I3.'ui1.ding"" V' A' V'
RichrnonC5';:jRoad--.
BaI1galC1f_€E~--":< .560..O_25..._ v
Respondents
('i3y'Sri.' Rao, Adv. for R2,
' R1 Serxfe'"d),._
;_T:hispMl§'A"i's"'ii1ed U/S 173(1) of MV Act, against
Jvudg-enient and award dated 10.03.2008 passed in
200'? on the file of XVIII Additional
'-Judge,' ."C».ot1rt of Small Causes, Member, MAC'I'--4,
IEia_nga1oreI,= ASCCI-I-4, partly allowing the claim petition
for ..oo.rr1pensation and seeking enhancement for
., compensation.
This appeal coming on for Hearing, this day, the
'Court, delivered the following:
C9"
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is by the claimants for enhancement
of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
2. Heard.
3. For the sake of convenience parties are’.’re’ferred’._t_o
as they are referred to in the clairn petitiorjfbefore the
Tribunal.
4. Brief facts of the case are:
That on 28-3-07, whefriltheg dgceaaa sfandanam
was road, opposite Orn Shakthi
temple; .oK’aiya11ari–agara_:,EBangalore, the driver of Indicab
begging regi-stratiori 1\fo. KA–53– 1062 came with high
rashwand negligent manner and dashed
a result, he fell down and sustained
grievous ‘injuries and succumbed to the injuries in the
it ‘ihrospitatl on 31-3-07. His wife, four minor daughters and
filed a claim petition before -the MACT,
if “Bangalore, seeking compensation of Rs.10,00,000/–.
The Tribunal by impugned judgment and award has
65/
awarded compensation of Rs.4,01,000/– with interest at
6% p.a. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunai the claimants are
seeking enhancement of compensation.
5. As there is no dispute regarding the
deceased Sandanam in ia-..moto’r-road iiaccivd.ent_; ands»
liability of the insurer of offend”i11g:fivehic1e, only
point remains for myoon.Aside%raption’~in’the appeal is:
Whetherfig V _the..4″~..”_-.._quantum of
compensa;tio11.V awarded’ tire” Tribunal is
just” -a,_r1d”~”‘3’pro’per “~–o1″‘*_ does it call for
enhanc-extent’? .. 7
6. Counsel for the parties
and of the Tribunai, I am of the
th:at.i_thecionipensation awarded by the Tribunal is
iandvproper, it is on the lower side and therefore
des.erér.cd to be enhanced.
.’.__i’he.«-“deceased Sandanam was aged about 38
i.yVears”at the time of his death in the accident, as evident
the post mortem report — £3x.P.7. Claimants in
‘E
«an-1%.:
support of their contention that the deceased was
earning Rs.200/– to Rs.250/—- per day by Working as a
loader in a mini tempo, except examining the first
claimant – wife of the deceased as
produced any document establishing the~:iricc:ni:ee:”‘of
deceased.
8. Considering age of thegdeceased r
of accident as 2007, his a Tempo
and he was maintajifiiiihg children
and mother, his assessed at
Rs.4,00Q / – assessed
by the are six claimants, 1/ <ith of
the income has to be deducted towards
personalliexpenses. Multiplier applicable to the age
' .=Vg1'o_up:_'of"'the–.deceased is 'I5'. So, loss of dependency
" vyorksl to Rs.5,40,000/«~ [Rs.4,000/- x 3/4 12 x 15}
and awarded as against Rs.3,36,000/– awarded by l
V' 'T V. Tribunal.
9. Rs.i0,000/– awarded by the Tribunal towards
transportation of dead body, Rs.15,000/– loss of estate,
Rs.i5,000/– towards loss of cons0rtiu”Inf”-«”and
Rs.25,000/– towards medical and incid–‘éntaliitchatfics’r
are just and proper and Vti*1’e1*ec scope.» Tor f A’
enhancement under these head’s,_ t
10. In addition to that’,’V'”a”i»sumdot- is
awarded towards for four
children at the rate of
11. Thus;”t}is?;psp:nc1aifnants: for the following
corn:pensa’ti7ogn:_A
pg!
. Lsss psr’sspds:;des}:y Rs.5,40,000/-
; Trans pvoftation dead body
‘ E fun’era.!…eXpenses Rs. 1 0,000 / —
“N;
t *VvI,;osVsivo:t”‘consortium Rs. 15,000/–
iove and affection Rs. 20,000/-
Loss of estate Rs. 15,000 /-
u Medical St incidental expenses Rs. 25,000/–
Total R5.6,25,000/-
12. Accordingly the appeal is allowed in part and the
judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to the
extent stated herein above.
13. The claimants are entitled to a total
of Rs.6,25,000/– as against Ra.4,poipp,j;oouo/g% ‘aaw–ar§1éa_ri5y ”
the Tribunal, and corripensatian awardpetdp
Tribunal is enhanced by a:_sL1:rr1..of – with
interest at 6% pa. clajrn petition till
the date of reali_satio’n’;’» — if V
14. – is directed to deposit
the amount with interest
within.VtWo V’fr.on’i’the date of receipt of a copy of
this’ order. _ V’ ”
V ::of.the enhanced compensation Rs.40,000/–~
‘teach . proportionate interest is ordered to be
invested in F.D. in any nationa1ised/ schedule
r Post Office, in the name of the claimants 1 to 5
for a period of 3 years in the case of claimants 1 and 2
and 6 years in the case of claimants 3, 4 and 5 and the
remaining amount with proportionate interest is
ordered to be released in favour of the e1airnants__ 1 and
6 in equal proportion.
No order as to costs.
mgn*