IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANQAIVA'
DATED THIS THE gm DAY OF' N'OvEMBE:§r('2oo9._ _
PRESENT:
THE HONBLE MRJH-:3'1"IO--EN.--';i.1éAT1~L'
AND'-..
THE HONBLE MR.JUsT1O_E K.N.KESHA\ZA£'J_AIRAYANAI I
M.F.A.NO.1'56I1V-I/ 2OOE..{1vIv)
BETWEEN:
1.
SMT.M.N.PANKAJAKE;JHIA _ I
w/O LATE M.K.RANGA
HINDU, AGED 51 YEEARS
R.
S/O LATE RAO _ '
H1NDU,.V.AGE'D 26 YEARS "
. I¥.II4AI1I"'1;iP'}.'gé-:x'.,D.ELV{;Io']TI'
W7/O '
D /O LATE 'M.K.RANf§_rA«RAO
HINDI}, AOED 28 YEARS
ALQL ARE RESIDING AT No.9.
1-1_F~LO.OR, I cRO'sE,----«POL1cE ROAD,
I ~.BA\1OALOREg 53.
.. . APPELLANTS
A _ -{Ey's1é:';i}c.['sATH1sH KUIVIAR, ADV.~ ABSENT]
A:§:D_j, . I
2.
I PEHANKARA S/O PU'I'i'ASWA}\/{Y
__-'HINDU, MAJOR,
R/AT NO476, I MAIN, em CROSS
YESHWANTHPUR.
BANGALORE H 22.
THE BRANCH MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD..
DIVISION N010, ST. PATRICK BUILDING.
3
I FLOOR, MUSEUM ROAD.
BAN GALORE M25. RESIPONDENTS
{By SRl.S.V.HEGDE MULKHAND, ADV. FOR R-2-ABSENT.
NOTICE TO R~1 IS DISPENSED WITH.) *
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173{1} or Mv Acfr*'A£3A'1'N?sjf"'rHE
JUDGMENT 3; AWARD DATED 21/9/20r;)s~ pAs.sED---e IN
MVC.NO.2390/2004 ON THE FILE or THE.sVI_I'~--.AD--.DOL.'JUDf3E;'=_
csc & MEMBER, MAC'I'~3, METROPOLITAN AREA; »BA1\?CxAi;»QRE'g 5
{scene}, PARTLY ALLOWING THE c.LA_1M' PETITION FOR._ .
COMPENSATION & SEEKING or ''
COMPENSATION.
THIS M.F'.A. coM1NG"'--AA.D'1r¢ FDR'---HEA_'E.1AiEll"'THs1s DAY,
N.K.PA'I'IL, J.. DELNERED THE FD1.L..Qw1Ne.:« _ i
This appeal is....éire.cted:._a§ainst_=the judgment and
mid tciatetii;;1l;9,»2'DE{)5At passed in lVi.V.C.No.2390/2004
on the't..f1£e Motor Accident Claims
"V_'>I'1*§'ib1:1__OOI'1al~1Il.O "(:'-ECHCHV-3), Bangalore ('Tribunal for brevity),
' grdund that, the compensation of Rs.5.28,072/-
O' .aWarde'di'j_D§*VVthe Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum,
is inadequate and requires enhancement.
2. The brief facts of the case are that, the appellant
No.1 is the wife and appellant Nos. 2 to 4 are the children
of deceased M.K.Ranga Rae, Who was running
/I
._____,n"_._..»--~--»---""'"""""'
I
z
6'
Bhuvaneshwari Correspondence College and--'jals_o.lg'duoing
Computer saies and service in hardware':i'tems';a-getting'
monthly income of Rs.20,000/gt Thatl_:',_l atj
about 11.25 a.rn., when the
riding his moped near'~v..::Circlel' ;l'emple,
Sadashivanagar, came with
high speed driven and negligent
manner an'd"dashed,_ lmoped, as a result
of w?riicl'l.,1: sustained grievous head
tofltlielllsame later. On account of
the dleath of-:l:\:'/:i';lK}Ranga Rao in the motor vehicle
acgcidentflthle'appellants filed the claim petition claiming
17,90,000/~ against the respondents.
‘Tre claim petition had come up for consideration
beforje :_i<§,§s' Tribunal on 219.2005.
3. The Tribunal, after hearing the learned counsel
on both sides and after considering the oral and
documentary evidence available on record, by the
judgment and award, allowed the claim petition in part
ii
4
and awarded compensation of Rs.5,28.072/«~ with interest
at 6% per annum from the date of petition till thedate of
payment. Being dissatisfied with the I of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal,
have presented this appeal on”the’«gro_iunJd the xsaildf
compensation awarded by the’.fFi”i.bunal’,_–v’r.is.
and requires enhanCemen’tr.:iby
and award of the Tri’biinal.;*i””‘ ”
4. We have gon.e..thro’ugh ilhelvggrodnds urged in the
appeal * ‘Careful consideration of the
irnpugnedxh award and after thorough
evaluation of th.e…Qr~iginal records available on file, We are
‘ {or the Tribunal has committed error
income of the deceased at Rs.5,000/– per
month; without assigning any Valid reasons and without
.Vtaki’ng into Consideration the evidence of PW.1 who has
stated in unequivocal terms that the deceased was aged
about 55 years and was an educationalist and
businessman running Z/eral institutions as referred
‘fl_M~_’_”#’_A_____M_,,._.I
/
z»
above, getting income of Rs.20,000/m~ per month.__ As per
the Bank extracts of the deceased at 19,
they show that he was getting an
Rs.l0,000/– per month. This.-aspect
not been looked into nor
Tribunal while determiningilthe t:he”‘deceasedl.
Having regard to fact;s”‘an_d’circumstances, we take
the income of the — per month
from all sotttces .:’.atter”vltdeduyctling his incidental
expenses: the institution, payments
towards ‘payment of salaries to the staff
etc;,» We take the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/-
as against Rs.E”),O0O/– per month taken by the
it multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is ‘9’.
But i–j_n”view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the
it caseholf Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport
“I.hCoi*poration and another reported in 2009 ACJ 1298
{SC}. as the deceased was aged about 65 years as per the
post mortem report, the appropriate multiplier applicable
/2
.1
L
{“3
is ‘7’, but we cannot apply the same to the caseon hand.
T herefore, having regard to the age of the on
the date of the accident, we accept the
by the Tribunal. Out of the incoIr1’e.Ado_’1»”‘/ AV
if we deduct 1/ 3” towards v4pe rsona1’thLe
deceased, the net income to
Therefore, we — X 12 X 9)
towards 1oss of Rs.3,60,072/–
awarded *
awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/–
towardse«~.;hossVVV’ A’.e’st.a’te, Rs.10.000/– towards loss of
ciohsiortitgm, aRs..§..,.4L0,000/» towards medical expenses and
V towards conve ance, nourishin food and
Fcharges. Having regard to the facts and
circurnstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the
,:s’an1e are just and reasonable and do not cail for
interference by this Court.
7
6. Further the Tribunal has committed error in
awarding Rs.3.000/~– towards funeral eXpenses.V_~which is
on the lower side. Having regard to the the
deceased was a businessman,&/ having’ n’1ulti_lfarious_V
activities and also taking into aconsiderationltheexpenses’.
incurred, we deem it fit to awarti.V_lQs.1.C;_;’iQ0O;’–ll’towards
transportation of dead bo’d.Sf”.and llexlperises as
against Rs . 3000 /»w awardpealibyt:i1aT::bua’a1.’i’i
“K. For the_ forego’i1ig reas0r1s~, appeal is allowed
in part.’ judgment and award dated
21.9.2005″ paaaeatlipm.i::M.V.c.No.2390/2004 on the file of
‘M.ot_oi* Accident Claims Tribunal–iII {SCCH~
_ is hereby modified by awarding
” aampaaaaaa of Rs.6,07_00’0/W as against Rs.5,28,072/–
awarldedl by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation of
.V:l§S:«78,928/– shall carry interest at 6% per annum from
the date of petition till the date of deposit. The break up
is as under:
3
. Towards loss of dependency Rs.4,32,()00-00
. Towards loss of consortium Rs. 10,000-00
. Towards loss of estate Rs. 10,000~OO
. Towards medical expenses Rs.1,4»0,00’O.+OO
. Towards conveyance, nourishing
food and attendant charges Rs, _…5,'{)OO#_{)(} K
. Towards transportation of ll .
dead body and funeral expenses Rs. “-.lO,:,O0O–O0–«
U3 CJ’l:-$3-ODl0+–*
roan t~_? Rs1i£nz5oQiQo_” A
The second respondent?-7 inntsuraiacle_lCon<{par:y is it
directed to deposit the .e:n~h_ancedV_ cornplensation with
accrued interest, within a_.period"–~of f01i1"vW€€l§{S from the
date of of jaiidgment.
the Insurance Company, the
same -be -released in favour of the first appellant
i17:1liI1′?i1i&ie1y.ll . _____ .. e
1 is directed to draw the award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
H Sd/w
EUBGE
RS1′