IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER,
PRESENT L
THE HON'BI..E MR. JUSTIWOE :3f' A
ANQ _ A ¢
THE HONBLE
1VI.F.A.NO. 1364é;fi"2'oo6
BETWEEN:
1.. SMT ZOHARA - _ .
AGED ABOUT 34 YEA'£as.f
_
AGED ABOUT 2--9' YEARS"
S/O LAf1fE ABD_UL_JAI_.EEL
Ex)
3.
. A "-EAGED ABOUT 1"7'"YEARs
= --. _D,'.O'LA'1fE3.ABDUL JALEEL
' ._AOED AEOUT 1.3 YEARS
'D/O LATE ABDUL JALEEL
1. ., : A..JU:\1''1D
,_ AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS (MINOR)
" S/O LATE ABDUL JALEEL
'O fa' * ZAKIRA
AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS, MINOR
D/ O LA'I'E ABDUL JALISISL
7!'. KHA'I'IZAM'I\/IA
AGEI) ABOUT 89 YI'€AI-"QS
ix.)
\«V/ O LATE ISMAIL
NO.3 TO 6 ARE MINORS, REPTD. BY NEXT
FRIEND CLAIMANT NO. 1,
ALL ARE RESIDING AT BADRIYA HOUSE.
KOKKADA VILLAGE AND POST
BELTHANGADY TALUK D.K ...'.AI">EEI.,LANIS "
(BY SRIZPUNDIKAI ISHWARA BIIATZ5 ADV). 'A
AND: A I
1. SRI A SUBBARAYADU
MAJOR
S/O OBALA REDDSW-.,
NO 19, PORT 'B', " I
KALASIPALYAM
BANGALORE "
2. THE OI2.IE.NT;éILI3'.IN~SjI1I§IxNC.E L*i*D..
CFéIIKI{AI\INA _GARDEN_, _
SANKAI'ENSATION.
-- TI--IIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL I-IIEARING THIS
DAY, N .K.PATIL J., DELIVERED THE I'OLLOWING:w
3
JUDGMENT
This appeal by the claimants arise out of”-the
impugned judgment and award dated 18.7.2006.
No.95€a/2002 passed by the E Addl.
Member, MACT II, Mangalore ((hefeiIi_afi«ef*«ireferted
‘Tribunal’ for short).
2. The Tribunal by and
award has awarded a — interest
at 6% pa from the date. theV._Vpetit’ifioh”til-l’V’1’ea1isatior1 as
against.ti1e_ci’airh’:¢iof ti1e’~claifi1*ahts for ?18,00,000/– on
accountof the of4V_th:e”deceased late Sri.Abdul Jalal
in the roadtzeaffici accivderit. The claimants claiming that
i.Vthe._’:giua:_Iitu.m ot’V’coh1pensation awarded by the Tribunal
have presented this appeal.
facts of the case are :-
Civaiimant; No.1 is the wife, claimants 2 to 6 are the
children and ciaimants 7 and 8 are the parents of
deceased. They filed claim petition under Section
V’ 166 of the MN. Act ciaiming cornpeI1sai’.ion on account.
of the death of the deceased cxozitezidirag that,, on
28.4.2002 at about 3.30 am. when the deceased was
3;? it”, …
:9
<1
proceeding to Bangalore in his lorry bearing
No.KAl 9 / 89 l 6 after loading plywoods at T halapady,
Mangalore and when he reached near Rajapura
on Bangaloreivlangalore road in Chenn_araya'p',a–t.na.._g' i.
Taluk, at that time, the bus bearing' if
driven by its driver in a high speed:-and in. a _r'ash~vl'i_a1fi1d.:
negligent manner, came frorH,_iopposii,€._sideV-froinrwyong " V
side and dashed against they–lorry and dn'evvt.o..Vtl1e said
impact, the lorry was and the
deceased sustaii-riled giiievoiis injuiifi.es'and succumbed to
the same-_ the further case of the
claimants' that tVl'1e."'d'ecea»sed was aged about 36 years,
owner–ucu:n–driVlerv"earning ?l5,00()/~ p.m. He was the
*soVIe.Vbrevad'vyinner in the family. Due to his untimely
telaimants have suffered socially and
econoifnically severeiy, The first claimant, being the
if lost her husband at the young age, claimants
to 6, being the children have lost the love and
affection of their father, their security in life and their
expectation. and guidance of their father and their
fL1i;ure life jeopardi:/,.ed. Claimants 7 and 8 being the
2' as/"'1
3/
3
parents. senior citizens. instead of seeing the progress
of their son have lost their son during their life time.
The Tribunal taking into consideration a_ll».t”h_es_e
relevant. aspects, after assessing the gorapl’
documentary evidence and other ..re_leVa:’1t”1i1*ateri’al’_”»on_ it
file, has allowed the claim petitioliap in:
compensation and the elainianlts not ‘beingVsati”s..fie’di With ” V
the quantum of c0mpensaticn’p_’*.li’aV.e pres–en,ted this
appeal, as stated supra.’ it l
5. We heard’ V’c’e-unsel appellants
and the -_ learn.e”d_h*counsel’ for the insurer for a
considerabl_e ‘length of “ClI;i_}v€.
After careful’pc:0nsideration of the submission of
‘the~1ea.1jned.,:c’ounsel on both sides and after perusal of
the award of the Tribunal. what emerges
is t.h’at; thehoccurrence of the accident, resultant death of
A i~:lj’»i’hel”deceased on account of the injuries sustained by
‘ him in the accident are not in dispute. Further. the age
and occupation of the deceased are also not in dispute.
However. the Tribunal has assessed the income of the
cleceased at ?5,OOO/W pm. which is on the lower side.
géi,
./ i..~»~»/*'””‘””
6
Having regard to the age, occupation, year of occurrence
of accident and the number of dependents, We can
safely re-assess the income of the deceased at ?E3.0f)’O/–
pm. to meet the ends of justice. Out of
fourth is deducted towards his personal and’
adopting the muitiplier of 15 as oer
(2009 AC} 1298], we arrive at”._the cc,fi:;§ed;51*sa4§;1¢’::
towards loss of dependency X 12
X 15}. A d 3 A Z
7. The Tribunal €30,000/–
towards, loss of”Vio%.?e’ra;’1″d_ affection and therefore, we do
not i_r1terfe’:e with Having regard to the facts
and.»«eircttmstarlceswof the case, we award ?10,000/–
toiwoarcisvul0ssrof__consortium, $10,000/– towards loss of
‘1€o;ooo/- towards trar1sportat,i.on of dead
flvbod3r, zftisrleyral and obsequies expenses thereby, the
“.j_’ae13e11Aa1’1Vts are entitled to 360,000/«~ towards the
‘ co;1vent;ionaI heads.
8. In alt. the appellants are entitied to total
()()I’T1p(-3I1S8.f,3(JI”1 of €870,000/– as against ?5_.99.440/–
awarded by the ‘I_’1*ib11na1. The break up is as foilows :~
%§ ……… M
X M”
1. Loss of dependency ?8,}().0OO/–
2.Loss of love and affection 330.000/–
3.Loss of Estate z”10,00o;*i.{“‘
4.Loss of consortium ?1Q;_:C)'{‘,’al{f).§/5.’:
E3. Towards transportation of dead y _ it
body. funeral and obsequies ~ «
expenses
Total
The enhanced cornpensat,ion_Comes’to.§’_2,iZlD,560/»
which carries interest date of the
petition till ‘
9. Haxtingl facts and circumstances of
the easeiptas the appeal is allowed in part.
and” award of the Tribunal in MVC
18.7.2006 is modified. The appellants
here’ir1,.._are.«–“”entitled the enhanced compensation of
H H K / » with interest at 6% pa. from the date of the
.’ petition till realisation in addition to the compensation
T “awarded by the ‘l’rit:)una1.
The second respondent -insurance company shali
deposit the enhanced comper1.satior1 of ?2.’?’G,5E30/~
8
within -4 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of
this judgment and award.
apportionment to the appellants are as follox ‘ ~’–
i)
From out of the enhanced compensatio.n%i’-.44_the
?’40,000/– each with proportiof1’a”te:’_’v ,iritei”esi:. “‘ it
shall be invested t.h_e=.
appellants 4,5 ar;d”‘~~.c6– lr’nil:r1or_ of
deceased in any nat_i.orl1’ali’z:ed / s.ch*e.r,lt1lVed bank
till they attain to appellant
No. 1-In-oth_er r,o”‘ the «vzinterest accrued
on it p l’riod’ical’l§f:lfo_rtheir welfare.
?5Q_’,OOvOl/–_ ivlithiilllproportionate interest shall be
it invesfea;}–..j:r;:”‘th.e name of the appellant No. l–Wife
._’_oAfp ‘«.dert_eased in any nationalized/ scheduled
a period of five years renewable by
it . another five years with liberty to withdraw the
interest accrued on it periodically.
iii] The remaining compensatior). of?l,00.560/– with
proportionate interest shall be released in equal
proportion to appellants l and 7—wife and
fl
$5
9
mother of deceased immediately on deposit by
the insurer.
Office to draw the award accordingly.
TS