. IN THE HIGH COURT OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
Dated this the 27"' day of August. 2099
Present
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K SREEDHAR;"'i':'.21Q:_'__:: "
&
THE HON-flLE MR _
Miscellaneous First Appeal / V
Between:
1
Lakshamma W/0 }3;14_iS§gov{Jde1§.
45 yrs, R/a Arakere "
Srirangapatna Talulg V
Swamy Sfo' fiu:s.ig0ivda., 256 V 'V
R/a Arakérc in. Sr£1'a:n_g'a-;;3atna..'fq .
1\/£andyi3._VDijs'trict » _
Appellants
{By Sri sh; 'mgu1,_ VA*Vc:f\'/=..): " .
And:
R__?AShjVas}ié1111«:ar«S/0 A S Ramegowda
R/é2 P.r£11:¢re in Srirangapatna Tq
. '~M&nti3JEtv',DiStriCt
ggrancfij --manager
A '--..__Ori_r~:ntaillnsurance Co Ltd
Sfifangapatna
j Mandya District
* H Narayana S/0 Hombegowda
'R/a Srirangapatna
Mandya District
4 Branch Manager
United India Insurance Co Ltd
Srirangapatna, Mandya District
Respondents
(By Sri B C Seethararnarao, Adv. for R3;
Sri K Suresh, Adv. for R2; Sri A S Mahesh,
Adv. for R1]
This First Appeal is filed un’der”‘€:’;1 Motor
Vehicles Act to set aside the award ‘._of conipensation
366/1998 on 18.11.2003 by theVMAC’i’.._’1\/landya, . «.
This First Appeal comin锑i.on for. days’
Sreedhar Rao, J delivered the foi1oWing:VV
One Manjunath isA_t_he_ avocation was
selling plastic’ atenlsils. — The deceased was travelling
in a buslinsiired respondent, from Mandya to
Araker_e,The ‘ms coming in the opposite direction, insured
‘lvl’VJ.rith”V:tlrli’ei..4%11″respondent. collided with the bus in which the
A.._tr;;velling. As a result of the accident,
Manjnnatb ‘died.
” _ A l””i’_he deceased was a bachelor. The mother and brother of
deceased had filed the petition seeking compensation and
%/
are in appeal seeking enhancement. The Tribunal has found
that the accident occurred on account of the negligence of
drivers of both the vehicles. The occurrence of the accident,
negligence of the drivers of both the vehicles and cov~er:’agl_leV.vof
insurance of both the vehicles is not in dispute_._=3l_:lhe’V.’a’ppee1l’ .
pertains only in respect of enhancement of compensation. ” _
On reappreciation of facts and evidence, ‘i’t’i_s’3’.t:st”and
proper to infer the notional, i_ncom’eplof the:..”.ldeceased.”atkL
Rs.2,000/- per month. Since thle’i«.cleceased”is laibiachpelor, 50% V
of income is to be deducted tovitards personal expenses and
Rs. }.,000/- would enure to the _.o_f’thelbd_ependants. The
age of the ‘rnother’:’15p:’3S’l’years at the time of the accident.
Hence, thel”smlulVtipl1er’.l. apply. The total loss of
_._depend<enc"y wodld»-be Rs.1,000 {income} x 12 (months) x 15
by{rnultipiierjvhsrfis.1,530,000/–. The mother is entitled to
Rs.2s,goog;~.iitogms loss of expectancy and Rs.5,000/~
V towards expenses. In all, the mother of the deceased
x)iiO*t1l€il beentitled to compensation of Rs.2, 10,000/– as against
it’pe.11:§s..’1′;a–2,oo0/- awarded by the Tribunal. On the enhanced
it “c’o1npensation, interest payable would be 6% pa. from the date
qgxk.
of petition til} payment. The entire enhanced compensation
shall be payable to the Ft appellant without provision foffixed
deposit.
Appeal is partly allowed.
An