IN THE HIGH COURT OF KAIRNATAKA AT BANGALORE BATE!) "rms THE 13% DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2010 BEFORE THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SRIZ)}3NIVAS;E' Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 7419. -a--.--f~.. Between 1.
Chikkamuniyappa __
S/0. Late Chinnappa ‘
Aged abaut 49 Years.
2. Muninarayaneinzfifiai ; AA
W/O. Chikkan1L1niyappa
Aged about 42 Ye’:’:L1″S ‘
Both. ar.;e”R’/At Véfi1§ataTgiri1:o’te,
Vi} ay”ap_i;11″”é1 ;;:_I”i1_()’.3_14’i , V ” eV’a.1:1gh3a11i Taluk,
,VBa11gTa![Qre P_u1’a1″E)’1Strir:t.
‘– ‘ V ” . ‘ ‘ Apps.-llantg
[Bjf Visflfitjéilatha, Adv.)
‘ V ~ . _ %(:}af1gadhara,
A “S”/3:)». MuI1in.arayanappa,
1»1aj::r..?’
R’/’ air.’ Venkatagirikote,
~~ vvijayapura Hobli
Devanahalli Taluk,
V H Bangalore Rural District.
2. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd,
181 floor, Mayura Complex,
Next to Pezenya Ind}. Ass. Bhavan,
KIADB Main Road. Peenya,
$0
Bangalore ~ 560058.
Re-spondents
[By Sri. A. K. Bhat, Adv. for R2,
notice to R1 is dispensed with}
$=k=i=
This MFA is filed U/S 173(1) of Mv ACt&V.aga.lh:sta..ti’-2e
judgment and award dated: 17.3.2008 passed”
No. 231/2004 on the file of the Presidi1H1_g”‘Qffi§:er; *”‘a–st_
Track C0u1*t«lV and MACT, Bangalore (R) Di’sat’5’ictV, partly’ ”
allowing the claim petition gfor_dCQn?_per1*sat–i.Qn”and
seeking enhancement 0fcompef:sa:t_iOI1_ ‘ ”
This appeal Coming» A.Admissi-QIi;,..;”t’hV£s’: day} l
the Court, delivered the follow.i_1»’1g;V
up T
This appeal seeking
enhsvlhcelriiefit
2. Heard. is admitted and with the
consent learned.’VCol;znse1 appearing for the parties It
disposal.
< "'FCr_th'eV'sake of Convenience parties are referred to
as*–the'y. referred to in the claim petition.
V as "B1'ief facts of the case are:
$3;
That on 02.03.2003 when deceased Shivaprasad
proceeding as cleaner in the mini lorry bearing
registration NO.KA.0-4 A 5892 along with a <;:0o.l_ie by
name Jagannatha and when the said levrlfy-.._'l'evas
proceedings towards Poddatzur ii: dashed agai11s1;~aj'i5oad
side tree on account of the rash and negligent d_1<i\§irig–o1_" 0
its driver, as a result Cl€C€'.}S€f.'14 S'hiva'pr';asa.d_l_gand 0'
Jagannath died on the spotfiu'pa;;?en'ts,g_of
deceased Shivaprasad filed a4¥__elai_rn petition V'oefor'e,
MACT, Bangalore eomgjevnsration' of'
Rs.5,00,000/– and the 4ll"T_ribVunal" 0} awarded
eompensaliorig 7.3.000/~ with interest at 6% pa
5 "rio regarding death of deceased
Shgixlfaprasadi fiiliheliaecident, negligence and liability of
offending vehicle the only point that
' ~. remaVii1s_"_vior~ eorisideration is:
H «V Whether the compensation awarded by
-the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it
call for eiihaneement or reduction’?
8. After hearing the learned Counsel appearing for
the parties and perusing the jtidgment. and award of the
Tribunal I am of the View that the <:omp_en_sa_tion
awarded by the Tribunal is not just and .
is on the lower side and therefore».it, to' hell'
enhanced.
7. Deceased Shi\raprasadWVv*as léfiyears as
on the date of his as evident from
post rnortern’ _re.p.ort.:.~’** parents of the
deceased! that the
decea.sed_§vafs ~V p.m. by working as a
cleaner examined first claimant as
PW’ 1. to the accident disclosed that
}.’1§~:’,:Sl_,E1S.t3l:I’1€d”l11j1lI:iCS in the accident and died while he
“v–Wori4:irig as cleaner in the offending lorry.
the age of the deceased, year of accident as
2003 and his profession as a lorry cleaner his income
reotild “be assessed at Rs.3,500/~ pm. as agaisnt
Rs.2,00O/W assessed by the Tribunal. The deceased
was a bachelor. Hence 50% of his ineome is to be
6
Rs.1.,73,OO0/W awarded by the ‘I”ribuna1 with interest. at
8% 13.21. on the enhanced compensation of
Rs.1,€>2,000/~ from the date of claim petition”‘tiI}«.::ii*1rie
date of realisation.
11. The Insurance Company di::Ae<::teda,.t1()..'deposit ~t11e
enhanced compensation"i_with i~nteresr;;"A'{rg:'it1f;in_V§ twods»
months from the date of of this
judgment. Out compensation
Rs.1,25,00(_)_/.{:w_ith is ordered to
be investeddddiin 2176 claimant who
is in any nationalised or
schedule with a right to withdraw
intj.e1_fest ""periodi–_cai1y"~~–and the remaining amount is
'd V' . A o:rde1te.d to be i"eie'ased in favour of both the claimants in
" .equa_I'' proportion.
E x No ‘order as to Cost.
Vb/–