High Court Karnataka High Court

S Anitha vs G B Hanumantha Gowda on 22 July, 2008

Karnataka High Court
S Anitha vs G B Hanumantha Gowda on 22 July, 2008
Author: Manjula Chellur Malimath
     

  7s'N YESHWANTH KUMAR

....3_....

IN THE HIGH Comm' OF KARNTATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 221m DAY 01? JULY, 2003  

PRESENT

"I'I-IE HONBLE MR£JUS'l'lCE MANJU'LA..CfiELi§§}l§? % T4  .  

AND

THE HONBLE MR.J'Us:m;§:E  MALi§;;A%rH f; 

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST    (:;)F' 200f>

BE'rw;E:EN f1%, 

w/(3. LATE=D'K NARAYANA REDDY
AGE1) -ABOUT 42 YEARS
F, ._;f Rio 18'?" CROSS, GUMASTHA COLONY

'  O"jLATE D K NARAYANA REDDY
 A ,:ED§..ABOUT 23 YEARS,
" R"/.0 13" CROSS, GUMASTHA (3OLON'Y
CHITRADURGA

S /0 D.K.NARAYANA REDDY
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
R/() 181' CROSS,
GUMASTHA COLONY
CHYPRABURGA

 



Lk (B52 sri s'sR:sHA;LA, ADVOCATE, FOR 1222;

V'  THIS MFA IS P'£LED U/s 173(1) 01:' MV AC1'

    !3ATEI):30/()6/2005 PASSED IN MVC Nofqis/2003 ON

7

4.* KARIYAMMA, »   %
W/0 LATE KRISHNA REDD¥(I}EA'fi_)) }« A
*1f%~4 DELETED AS L.Rs of KARIY.Arv§_1v1A L
ARE ALREADY ON  * V   L
  '   

(By Sri : K B SATYANARAY}.P{A _8s"V
Sri P.RAGHURAMULU,_  " « . % _

1 G 13 HfiN'¢MAx'T1'HflGOWDA 
S/OTG 13- B"A$AVAi'=A¢¥Ai*F'A '
AGED.VABa.C§I_l'I' 28 YEARS _
'R/MO'~S;§;(}A.Lé~'i(}A'Il'E VILLAGE
'53UT1Db'RG$*P0S'l'VA%%M. ~  
JAGAL'UR *mz,UK *=-  
DAVANAGERE msfrklcl'

:2, ._i 'f'IiE BRAESECH MANAGER
~  r;A1=IQNAL  ('30., L:r1:).
» $ % BRANGH OFFICE,
 " ~  ROAD
1  GHETRADURGA  RESPONDENTS

RGAIN ST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD

THE FILE 0:? THE I ADDL. crvn. JUDGE} (sR.1:>N.) &
ADDL. MACT, CHFFRADURGA, PARTLY AELOWING THE

-5-

the 1st appellant and further incidental
Rs.1(),00O/- was awapded. Aggrieved an ‘A

quantum of compensation awariieti the

appeiiants have come up before – 2 V’ t

3. As already stated abo’s’e”L_:tvé”need f1’ot.go’Einto the
issue of actionable neg4″h’%genée.as coverage of

iI’1SI3I’aIICC o1’_tl:2e_ vehicle, admitted the

said fact.””‘ t :f::;, ”

4. “men quantum of compensat1on’

Ex.’F§-5′ the Certificate of the deceased was

fétfifore the ‘I’ribuna1 and the gross salary of the

1 13,208/- as on the date of his death in

me’3eare2ob3. He was a Chief Artisan at K.S.R.’I’.C.

The salary certificate discloses that most of the
tietitietions from the salary were towards premium of

WLIC, PF, Group Insurance etc., and they were for the

benefit of the deceased and his family. No doubt, a good

amount of contribution was towards the

take home salary was Rs.6,147;’»~«. pit: ” ?Tx’hc >

‘I’ribuJ1al totally igxored me fact, \x*1jatevé;=_AA

deceased would have d()Vne_ i;i1l me v§vou1d

have enurcd to tt1s~;._lA:)cn¢:iii’t including
himself. In that account of his
untimely not available to
the fa111il3’g it is a loss to the
‘ was 50 years and he
would:Vv’hg§a’f: 8 years time fimn the date

of t.hC_v8C(Il;,4fi’f;’lfJ:,V1i.’ Chief Artisan even after the age

V” ..oi””:réfirement have sought for some other

he would have earned not less than

Rs.5,(‘)00/ –. A11 these relevant facts ought

Vtp taken into consideration by the Tribunal
assessing the loss of dependency to the family of

..vt;%ie deceased.

…-7…

5. From Rs.13,’203/-, the goss salary which he

was drawing at the time of his death, professional’ of

Rs.20()/- should be deducted, than it ‘saro1_._1$€:i*–

Rs.13,0(}8/« and 2/3rd of Rs.I3,O(}8,*.e.A4_:’::’s;fo–ijid

Rs.8,67″2/- per month. Atfivthiél

dependency, as he would’ have ;

years, multiplier of 8 has as the

next 4 years as the group between

48 toi’5fM2′ is– of Rs.8,67’2/– as the
contziirutiori to is Rs.4,336_/ –. When we

look. at ofcompcnsatior1 awardedgthe

.« J’udge’V(ii”d'”IV1ot allow any amount towards the

‘ and so also towards loss of love and

aaA:£-§’E’octi§::1;1 minor children as on the date of his dwth.

the appeal deserves to be allowed and the

A’ of compensation which is just and proper

” ” –[according to us is as undert-

a) Rs.8,672 x 12 x 8
=Rs.s,32,5__12/–

h)Rs.4,336/–x12x4 MRS.2~,~fl§3égVi_23;.f_?

C) loss of consortium to wife g ,4′? ..

(1) loss of love & afibction ‘ §« 132$’.
minor children V ” _ ‘ , ”

e) Fimeral and other “v.Ré~–.. ‘I0;Oi)0/« ‘
charges ‘ _ é_

= Rs.10,00()/_

~.’ifots¥i” s Rs.10,85,64o/–

appeal is allowed in-part with was

enh.anc:iiig. ‘£he compensation to Rs. 10,85,640/~ as

. .”agajnst’*’eiward of Rs.6, 10,112/-. The enhanced amount

carxjr iriterest at 6% per armum fimn the date

the petition till the date of deposit. The respondent

insured is directed to deposit the enhanced amount

-9…

together with costs and interest as

weeks from the date of receipt:'<)fmc()j;,~y

Iudqe

%:5 Sdf*
3uage