-Aged 15 yeafs,
ffleing Hiirger represented by
' V.{§ITél"petitioner Mother guardian.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF AUGUS'lf,...2J'()V(')::$h3;e:4"Vé~ ~
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUsT1eEf_'B.sREEN:vAsE,GowDA
Miscellaneous '/ 20l)E§ (NW C)
BETWEEN: l
1. Smt.
W / 0 late' C}_1ar1~1*1app'a,g ., x
Aged abo1;t:».4:3_yeaifs.. ._ V'
2. Rajannal... . 1 AV
8/ 0 late 2
Aged about«.20lyea:'s."".A' . l
Smt. »»S_§\§\farr1amI"r1a,V,VVV V' V
'Bed wife cgfelate Chafmappa,
'~._AgecI_, abgut ' 'years.
. " ..
8/ 0 A late Ch .,1;1ppa,
Ail are R/ at Gollu (Krishnapura)
Dibbur Post,
Chikkaballapur Taluk,
Kolar District. 2
AEPELLANTS
(By Sri. MB. Chandra chooda, Adv for .
A N D:
1. The New India Insurance,
Company Limited, 0
Rep.by its Manager, 'A '
Rajajinagar Branch,
Dr. Rajkumar road, _
Bangalore -~ 560:0'-10. _ V .. .
2. Sri. Bandeppa Redd
S/O ' .; .4 -
No. I, 6"" '12ih'CroSS_,
Ma11es'wa.rarn;;_ 0' A V' = ' »
Banga_1ore;»';§ 560
" A A " A ' RESPONEJENTS
(By Sri. Hegde.V'Pi/iullghand, Adv. for R1,
Sri. Chita'p.pga,.VAdv_. for
«fi1_¢.d' Under Section 173(1) of MV ACT
Judgment and award dated 01.09.2005
'p.assed._Vin 160.3442/2002 on the file of the XI Add}.
*-~}u.dge,--. :'Qonr't.--v"of small causes and Member, MACT,
I\JIeti*opo1ita;1.5;Area, Bangaiore (SCCH--12], partly allowing
the'«. cl_aj1n~' petition for compensation and seeking
'~ enhaneeirnent of compensation.
" This appeal coming on for hearing, this day,
_ 'SREENIVASE GOWDA J., delivered the following:
J U D G M E N T
This appeai is by the claimants “seeking
enhancement of compensation awarded b_y….the’i-“Ex/{otor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (here_in’~-after’
to as ‘the Tribunal’ for short].
2. For the sake of convenience xthe. parties are referred
to as they are referred to claini ~}oe”tition’;Ebelore the
Tribunal. ‘3 it 3 V
3. Facts of the case; ‘T
On 2sg;t06;v2″oog:tiug at p.rn. when the
deceased returning to his village on his
bicycle road, a Tipper lorry
bearingii.No.l{A~. 3330, came in a rash and negligent
dashed against him. As a result, he
llsustajneclfiinjnries and he succumbed to the injuries on
V -V the’.44’W.a3%:gV.totithe hospital. The claimants being his legal
3 have filed a claim petition in MVC No.34-422/2002
the Tribunal, seeking compensation of
Rs.12,00,000/–. The Tribunal by impugned judgment has
awarded a compensation of Rs.3, 18,000 / – with interest at
6% pet. from the date of petition till the date
Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation” 4_
the Tribune}, the c1ai1nantsV~–a’re~.¢in-‘_: j
enhancement.
4. As there is no appeéddifiledttdbgr
chailenging the finding of ribunai’ -on issue No.1
holding that the claimants the deceased
died on 29-6-V0.2′ due zfjasih-_Vparidazinegligent driving of
the tippe_r. they are entitled to seek
compentsatiorrlr oni3}4’V.’issue that remains for our
cons_fideration”‘ isfluwhether the compensation awarded by
is just and proper or it calls for
‘ tr ‘ ‘ it
learned Counsel appearing for the claimants
at-.s’ubii–:its that the Tribunal in spite of noticing that the
it Wdeceased was an agrieulturist, and doing miik Vending
fig
business and rearing cocoons, as evident from Ex.P.3, the
agricultural pass book showing that he wasfrearing
cocoons and Ex.P.4 is the pass book of
Society, showing that he was supplyingH__ni~i.,lk;
P.15 are the RTC extracts rt.
agriculturist still erred ‘inn ass’essing
Rs.3,000/– per month and of
instead of ’13’ ‘cornnensation of
Rs.2,88,000/– tVowarcis._.lvoss He submits,
even the Conventional heads
is on the», iiofiger therefore, he prays for
enharieernent –«.e_ompe_fisation.
6. __§i’Per contra; the learned Counsel appearing for the
.I11su1’ance–.:C.ompany submits, the contention of the
deceased was earning Rs.10,000/– per
doing milk Vending business and rearing
colc-oonvs, is not established. Therefore, he submits, the
luigjicorne assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.3,000/– per month
5%
and applying the multiplier of ’12’ as per the law
applicable at that time, is correct and he submits that
there is no scope for enhancement of
he prays for dismissal of the appeal.
7. The deceased was aged abo’L1_t”5O
from the post mortem 1’epo1’tlu–‘§1″I3_’VV.26V.–‘ ‘~ accident is of
the year 2002. The that the
deceased was __an milk vending
business by producing
Ex.P.3, that the income of
the deeeasedplasse_ssed:l.]o§<…t1ie.' tribunal at Rs.3,000/– is on
the lower'-side.
Fro.tn.4vth,e material on record, it can be easily said,
lithe.’-.VdeceVa_sed;;.Rivas earning more than Rs.4,500/– per
–V month,””V.pVl]°3Fd of his income has to be deducted towards
it l::e»..hist-pperslonal expenses and the loss of dependency has to
* heevlorked out from the balance of Rs.3,000/–, by applying
the multiplier of ’13’ as per the latest judgment of the
Supreme Court in Sarla Verma’s ease. Thus, the loss of
dependency would work out to Rs.4,68,000/– —
x 12 months X 13 multiplier) as
awarded by the Tribunal. I
9. Rs.}5,000/– awarded by as Tzjibtériali._.towafd$a..1ossA«of
estate, Rs.5,000/– towards’1os_s ofiiie-oiisortiuurlltiij,=RsV,5’3,ObO
towards Ioss of expeetaneyi”-and»_v towards
funeral and other eiipehses ; Iower side. The
Tribunal has riot awa’1’d’e*d[‘A ar1j,t”a.aInou_.I:it” of compensation
d”a.ffecfti0n.= As against Rs.30,000/–
towards loss ‘ an
awarded “under”differetitconventional heads, which is on
the tower side”, axdseviawétrd a sum of Rs.40,000’/–.
. V.’I’hus’;~.the eiaimants, in all are entitled for a total
a’–asanzi;aeasa:§:aaiiaf Rs.5,08,000/– as against Rs.3,18,000/-
awarded the Tribunal with 6% interest p.a. from the
}date of ‘claim petition till the date of payment.
g
11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and the
judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified. The
claimants are entitled for a total compeijsatlonié of
Rs.5,08,000/– as against Rs.3,18,000/– a.~l2sjz;%;1rg1¢%};:i”.tt’byT ‘-the
Tribunal with interest at 6% p;aT fmmflthe”datexioffclaimlT
petition till the date of payment.
12. In all other aspects. ‘..tl1o.fl:av§fard oftt’he~Tribuna}. is
undisturbed and no ordefaso–to ;co._3ts–{_’
tttt T T sd/~
ooooo JUDGE