Lateflhalitha Murthy.
A 4.VV
{Jr
"WM/i). Narayanappa.
IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGA:;c§fRf_«;
DATED THES THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER,' i.Ij": -
:PRESENT: fl ' V.
THE H()N'BLE MR.JUsTf€3E 5/§ ~I{:§P'13kTE;IIaj:" *'
THE HON'BLE
M.F.A. 2oQé§ 'iM\n
Between: V Vv 1 'V V
1. Smt. M.Chai111a,§}firna.,
Aged 31 b V_
W/0. Late
2. S.Ra}:nyag . V
Aged V8'y'ears,_ , ,
D/ 0. Late Shanthaa
3. Chetan Sha111eI§1aIfiu1;fhy:
1°_;ged:5y'ears, .....
" _Aged 56--;}jea17s.
S-,./__0. Nagappa.
-Nanjamma,
Aged 49 years,
The appeiiants 2 & 3 are minors.
Represented by their mother and
Natural guardian Smt.1\/I.Chanr1amma,
~ Ukppellant.
R)
All are R/at. No. 2, 61" Cross,
2*" Main, Shivanahalli.
Rajajinagai',
Bangalo1'e--56O 010.
[By Sri. N.S.Bhat, Advocate}
And:
1. V.V.Ashokan,
Major by age,
S / o. Kunhikannan. .
Valiayavalappil,.¢ _ A
House, Maha.palya, A
Mamba, _ 1 , . ..
Anjarakar;-jdi 'o_'an'rn;1i_§,» _
Kerala State. ' A
2. The l\}{[an.agelr',"».'~V . _
New India 4Assurafi:je'iCo;--,.. Ltd. ,
No. 963/2; 2"" F7loo1f',* _ "
Near Mu.nii:jipa.l Bus Stand,
Kannuif, . _ 'A V'
Kerala __Sta_te--67'O 0.0.3
" .Regional Office: Unity Building
B.anga1Vo{e?5§{)V.:O27.
' "'1ne;¢--:.._ Mission Road.
. . . Respondents
'(By ..Ol".Mahesh, Advocate for R2;
served. "and unrepresented)
=I=*****=i=*
it ibis MFA is filed U/s. 173(1) of MV Act against the
~--..'.-Judgnaent and Award dated: 18/07/2005 passed in MVC No.
106/2001 on the file of the X} Add}. Judge, Court of Small
Causes and Member MACT, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore
.. l{SCCH--l2}, partly allowing the claim petition for
compensation and 1'Ig enhancernent. of compensation.
I' JAA «««««««««««««««««« rm-'
I
L
.
after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and
other material available on file, has allowed
petition in part and awarded the compe¥i:s’at.ion:ll V’
35,62,040/– under different headswith $9/o V
p.a., from the date of petition
Not being satisfied with the Coil*ipenslati.oi1V..axvaiigjed
the Tribunal, the appellants hiaife’.lpi*e:s”entedlth’is'”appeal,
for enhancement’ lconi — V. ,’
4. We counsel appearing
for the counsel for second
respondelntejl
5.’ veolunlsellappearing for the appellants
atwthe outset submitted that, the
decea.’sed”vLias viorliing as Technician in Helicopter Division
in and the salary of ?9,000/– per month and in
llaw laid down by the Apex Court in the case of
lterma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
it another reported in 2009 ACJ 1298, appellants are
~ “entitled for 50% of the salary towards future prospects and
%? i,.»»»=°~
: H/W
5
id
6
l /4″1 is to be deducted towards personal and living expeanses
of the deceased since there are four dependants
1/3111 as done by the Tribunal. Therefore,_.he’u_’subrnittedt
that, the impugned judgment and§.taward3 p-«as’se’d._.:
Tribunal is liable to be modified, _
6. As against this. learne’cl:Counsel”.forethez7lnsurer
inter~alia, contended thevvtimpugned
judgment and award pas.se’ci..1§y Further, he
submitted after the material
available compensation
under aItEthe.he’a’dVs/._ is just and reasonable and
therefore. nott(‘:”al’l for.yitnterferenee. However. he has
not disputed the’~1aWVt’laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla
{S_upra)Hand submitted that the same may be
C0nsi.dered aeoordance with law.
careful consideration of the submissions
by learned counsel for both the parties, after perusal
material available on record at threadbare,
.:””‘inc:i:uding the impugned judgment and award passed by
the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our
consideration is:
Whether the compensation awarded:l..l1§y*l..jf
the Tribunal is just and reasonable?
8. The occurrence of the
the deceased in the said accident arernot in-dis:pute’j’3 V
is also not in dispute about 29
years, working.» Division in
HAL of es, 173 /- per
month thlewdeceased was aged 29
years attlfie’ appellants are entitled for
future; inC_oII1e of the deceased at 50% of the net income
.bE§;’thle«._deceased as on the date of his death, in
la”w.’:”laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla
_ Vernia’s wherein, it is held at para–H that, 50% of
actual saiary is to be added to the actual salary income of
,th.e’d–eceased towards future prospects. where the deceased
a permanent job. In the instant case, deceased was
“aged about 29 years and therefore, 50% of net income of
04%
I
E.
the deceased works out to €4,086/~ and if the saIn”e–,pis
added, the total income comes to
**”4,086=12,259/–) Per month and per annum
to ?1,47,108 /–. Out of which. €14,200’/>5 ‘tee.zards.;1aeeme_”rax
and professional tax is deducted, the ¥ann_ual income i~:o1;j1esp he
to ?l,32,908/– and 1/4th (?33i,”227/e}’—olathe is
deducted towards the personals”arId._:’li{?ing expenses’ of the
deceased, the net annual’ $99,681/–. The
appropriate E\__/lul’tipHerj.appli_cable -is the deceased
was .aged…a,ab’Q_tit;l’1–1:29 years–….at,»§ the time of death.
Therefore, ‘-the of dependency comes to
t16,94,577’/daaeteladdd’eat’V.§’5,27,o4o/- awarded by the
, jfribtglnal aceord.i.ngly, it is awarded.
‘ =9, ‘fiavinéregard to the facts and circumstances of
thetcase, .we’i.a.*ward a sum of ?10,000/- towards ioss of
vdl’,..”_”consortEuvtn, ?10,000/~ towards loss of estate, 320,000/~
loss of love and affection at the rate of ?5,000/–
to the appellant Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 and a sum of
u:f?’10,000/a towards transportation and funeral expenses. In
9;?
.-“I: M
.1”
9
all, the appellants are entitled for the total Compensationieof
?17,-44.577/w and the break» up is as follows:
Towards Loss of dependency ? 16,94~,.57′? «
Towards loss of consortium
Towards loss of estate
if
it A .
Towards loss of love and affection 7 20′,OO’O._/–«. V __ ..
Towards funeral and transporta._tion hi’ it 10,”O{.)G/_~
eX9enses ” V
Totai
-.
10. FOI’§,l,hAfd¥ v§’t1″ieVv’Vappeal filed by
the and the impugned
Tribunal in MVC
No.1 ..-‘modified, awarding the
compensation _of?.l7A,?14:,”5l77/– instead of ?5,62,040/~
‘T V. “awaii’ded»-by”the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation
‘– with interest at 6% pa, from
it the date__of petition till its realisation.
i Zlnsurer is directed to deposit the enhanced
a._ce_mpensation with interest, within a period of four
it weeks from the date of receipt of 8. copy of this
it judgment and award.
.5
7′
‘” . r1or,o0o’/;_;t
‘ 120,000/–=
l 0
Out of the enhanced cornpensationa-.___ of
?11,82,537/– a sum of ?3,00,000/- with
interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit l
Nationalised or Scheduled Bank iidthe
the appellant Nos. 2 and 3 till thegfattain niajiority
liberty to the appellant No.1l”‘to:”iwithdraf{2V”Athelinterest
accrued on it, periodicallfizif-toVrl
A sum of interest
shall be Deposit in any
Nationa;’liaeVdl’lll _ in the name of
appellant”No’.1 five years and renewable
for arrotlder fllVe.years.l’anld a sum of ?1,00,000/- with
«interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit
or Scheduled Bank in the name of
V dd .each””of the abpellant Nos. 4 and 5 for a period of three
and renewable for another three years with liberty
to withdraw the interest accrued on it,
” ” ifieriodically.
The remaining sum of ?1,82,537/– V-with
proportionate interest shaii be released in faV0gr_’4*of’ii13e”A«V
appellant Nos. 1, 4 and 5 immediately, on _
Insurer.
Office is directed to drawthe award, ae»oC:rdiIi’g1y*.A.”vi it
tsn* ; ‘ ~
“‘-n.un.._