High Court Karnataka High Court

New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Sri Chandrashekar S/O Marimuthu on 4 November, 2009

Karnataka High Court
New India Assurance Co Ltd vs Sri Chandrashekar S/O Marimuthu on 4 November, 2009
Author: N.Ananda
1

IN THE HIGH comm OF' KARNATAKA AT BANGAL_0'RjE._«'_T~~.. _

DATED THIS THE mm DAY OF NOVEMBER,      .

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR.JUs'mi;;«; N::-AN§Afi"£3_AQ  % %

M.F.A.No.872l2009 CIW MFA.::;eQB z~i.%.:..  

MFA N0.872[ 2009
QETWEEQ:

New india Assurance Co.    «b
Rep. by Sr. DiViSi€d3$1'Manage1'~ _ . -.
No.40,  

B31183101'€'55:3" V   : '  ...Appc1lant

(By Sriytifllé  Advocates)

AND:

 . _1.   

A  S]  Maximuthu, major
'  ,Ne,36,'!.!_ L'-toss, 80 feet tow
 !vi:am3i12a:'gag., Chandra Layout
'--..Naga£$ibha#i, Bangalore.

  2. 

 about 33 years

    'Master Guruswamy

 "Aged about 15 yeerm

T   "  Kum. Asha

Aged about 13 ycaxs



5. Smt. Mayamma

Major
All are rla: Deshavara Village, Maiur Hobh
Channapatna Taluk
Bangalore District.

R3 85 R4 are minors, mp. by R2]

Natural guardian    

(By Sri K.Sha:ntharaj, Advocatfi fir  '£':.3 RS;  of
notice isdispenscd with)       

This appeal is  I73(1)"'of~'M.V.Act
against the judgmexlt   flat:-;d_'»1?',12.2008, id
in MVC No.435f2006 on the'fi!i:;of  fiistzict Judge,
Member, MACT, R ._Va:vmfimg rwmgwnsaflon with
interest at 6%    1  

MF'A.CRDB ! ~

BETWEEN:  " _

~'W]o.' Late 

- '-S/0.' 

 Ashé

 * .=._3/<5. Lat: Builaiah
. _  13 years

Cmss-objectors 2 as 3 am minors

Rep. by their guardian mother
Smt. Lakshmi.



4. Smt. Mayamma
W/o. Late Budiyaiah
Aged about 60 years

All are: 1:] 0. Dcshavara Vilhge, 
Channapama Taluk : ' A

Ramazaagaram District.   

(By Std x.snantham;', Advocatc}' 
AND:  %

1. New India Assuranecifle.  
Rep. by its Manager,  _ '  ' -.
Vokkaligara Bhavan, Hudson   1 ~-- 

2.     
S/Po. Manirmthm a;gc:'«Ma_1or
No;36; 2:31 owes,' 30"fg~;éi Rbad
Mam   «Layout
Nagarabhavi Road " 
    '  Respondents

" " (By  for my

* T "i'hi's'«._{ér.-$'s':2§£:3;;§ection in MFA zsIo.s72/2009 is flied under

AO"rder'/$'1 'fl'z.ii::. 'I23 %2fCPC, against the judgrnent; and award dated

17.1.2.i3008,  in MVC N<J.435[20{}6 on the fik: :35' the District
Jucigt;u,__ Member; MAST, R , partiy allowing the claim

 'vpetiticxn fag' compensation and seeking enhancement of
 wumpensatimz.

iii

 This appeal and cross-objection coming on for acimisaion

'M   day, the Court dciivered the following:



JUDGMENT

The matters are listed for V

mcortis are received, with the oonscx3;atA¢1i;’.3″3″AA_T A. ‘T

parties. they an: taken up for ‘

2. MFA 119.872] is Company
for reduction of 2009 is

filed by claimarafifi

have for parties and i have
been takcfi impugrzcd award.

v’:I_’_}1a to 3 are the wific and children and

F€.o;<Vl;""is the mother of deceased . On

met with an accident am'! succumbed

V -110 a 'i sp0t. The ciaimants have produced sewzal

to prove that dmsed eentinucd to sci}

even my his death. The claim' ants have

VT pmfiuccd passbook stated to have been issued by Milk

" VPxoducem Co-operative Society Limited, (lhanngma Taluk,

Bangalore Rum} District, to prove that deceased had sold the
milk subsequent to the date of accicient. Apparently, 24
documents produced by claimants are ihbricated documeyzxts.

The Txibunal relying on RTC extracts, which did not

the name of dwsed has determined income cf .

Rs.5.0GO/ ~ per month. The Tribunal befqrc '4 " =

of deceased shoukl have taken sexicigts goeé

claimants had relied on as 247*
documents. In an fairness, neat have

income of deceased.

It is obfioias Vthgt determined income of

.c{inSis_iefiiig the documents and without

‘~ ofAIn1n’ ‘i’heiefoI’e, hav1n’ g regard to the fact that

about 35 years at the time at accident

axistl i1e f_ ‘ by physical labour, X de1aerm1n’ e

..<:;f.:_t}ie deceased at Rs.3,00l)/~ per month. Having

number of dependents. I deduct 1/431* of the

of dmsed towards his personal and Ywing

"e:fpendimre. Thus, claimants are entitled. to capitafised has

& of dependency of Rs.4,32,000/~ (Rs.3,00{}/~ X 3/4 X 12 x 16).

3~J~c*/£1/LéZ?LM

Besides, claimant No.1 is entitled to

Rs. 10,000] — under the head "loss of consortiuxzfj' 9

1 to 4 am entitled to nompcnsaiion

head "loss of love 65 an'ecn2nn*,_.Rs.1e}ec£;;- unflér V

"loss to estate" and Rs.

expenses”. Thus, tit} total

compensation of Rs.4,72,O'(JV}().j–_”

5. In tlié
A a§RDER

MFA v._N”c..37:2V,¢ by insurance Company is

aocaptpd 5;; h§F’fi.CRO§ 910.124/2009 filed by claimants

‘is mg %%%%% H implxmed award is madam” .

Rs.6,I5,000/- awarded by Txibtmal is

stu :If§3§#v?,’?’2,{)()O/-. The said amount shat} carry

“~’««.__Vintcrcst’}21;A’:6% per annum fimn the dam of petition til} the

realisatkm. The apportionment payment anti

V. iinvitstmvcnt shall be in the mtio evolved in the impupcd

The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the

Court of District Judgc &. Member, MAC’? at Ramanagara.

5

Pattie’ 5 am directed to bear their costs. Ofice is

send back records along with a copy of drdezr,

SM