1.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH AT DIIARWAD
DATED THIS THE 27?" DAY OF' AUGUST, 2Q..£_Q' H
BEFORE
THE I-ION'BLE MR. JUSTICE 1{§I.CCCSV.::BQP«ANI\IA::
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No'.-2_I'39S/ (II/IVI I
BETWEEN:
AWADI-IUT ..
SURYAPPA WAKASE , .
AGE. 22 YEARS,
OCC. STUDE.N'T.,V ,
R/O.TOP ..
A I
DIST. KQLHAPU:F3. N
KUMAR ~
SYRAYAPPA
AGE. 17"'I'E}\RS',_ '
OCC. .,STUD'EI\IT,,
SIN4:;'E3 MINOR" REPRESENTED
I I - I3Y~HIS"MI'NoR GUARDIAN
A MATERNAIIV UNCLE
SRI.A'.7VA..GI{AD~i BALU SISAL
'AGE. 44 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/0...T0I3, TALHATKANAGALE,
DIST. KOLHAPUR, NOW RESIDING
AT}'=MARAGI ROAD, I<_AI<;ATI.,
TALUK Sz, DIST. EELGAUM.
... APPELLANTS
' *'*'(BY SRI. HARISHS. MAIGUR, ADV.)
I
as-
Ix)
I. SIDDHARATH.G.I\/IARDANE
AGE. MAJOR,
OCC. BUSENESS,
R/O. KURLI,
TQ. CHIKKODI,
DTST BELGAUM. '
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER ,
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE
CO., LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE_,"
SHANEAG CHAMBERS, I
KIRLOSKAR ROAD, '
BELGAUM.
LRRESPONDENTS
MFA FELED._.'I7'(*3.(11}_ OI_+',_VNIv\"'/"ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND ,_~.\.;'\7\fA'I-"\'3»E), V17/£a'9/2008 PASSED IN
M.V.C.NO. 1_85,7]'20f§E::,,_ON_"1'HB;"EILEEOF THE FAST TRACK
COURT Iva iI3'EI4GSAIUM,,"RARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION "FQ.R"._CQM.PENSAT1ON AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF' CO.1\a1.PENSA'FION.
THIS~APPE'AL"'COMiNG. ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS
THLS DAT, "['1f1E__COU"RT.___DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
are before this Court Seeking
~_?.”_j~erIi1anCement;. Of the Compensation as against the Sum
MVC.18S7/O6. The Tribunal has awarded the
H __COmpenSatiOTI of RS.3,93,000/~.
§
E
R
2. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and
perused the appeal papers.
3. The claimants are the sons of
Suryappa Wakase who died in the accident. _Witl’i:i=egarvd.Vto: ”
the grant of compensation under the:fi1.ead»._of_l”‘iog§.._.Aof_:
dependancy’ the ciaimants have co_nt.endeAd that the”«:die£:ee;sed v T’
was running a Kirana shop and /– per
month. The Tribunal license issued
by the Grama Panchai3:(‘a,_t’h that the
Kirana deiceased, in the absence of
proof of the monthly income at
Rs.3,000/–_ and deducted All’)./ll?)Vi’C.ilfor the purpose of considering
applied is 12. In this regard, it is
to bléi./stated 4t1f;e:l_iappropriate multiplier would be 13. In
T’ far as the incorne, it is no doubt true, as contended by the
T Counsel for the respondent–Insurance Company that
,l<:irana..li'lshop would still be available for being run by the
faJfif1i1y.-inembers and as such, the income as claimed cannot
be considered. However, what is required to be noticed is
that when there is no material to indicate that family
members did not have any other avocation, naturally, in such
an event, it cannot be assumed that other family
would run the Kirana shop. Therefore, in a circunistvanlce if
this nature where the mother of the cl1il"d'1*en' Was. ab;
Kirana shop and was earning the in.come.for_V_the family,
View it would be appropriate to of
RS120/– per day. If this is'"tal<en*,lth'e–:lrrionthly clo'ntrlibution
would be at Rs.3,600/-. EVenAV_oi1tiliof is to be
deducted Rts:2V,400/ — is taken for the
purpose of calculationil'and"if"'"compensation is calculated,
amount of :Rs.3,7t5lu,/Lf)O/t' isi-tofbe awarded under the head of
'loss of depenitl.anl"Cy_'. the Tribunal has awarded a sum
of would be entitled to balance of
";.§sV.t'3_6,4OO';—'.–. juncture what is also to be noticed is
Jwhiole considering the claim of the appellant for
ll'tl.'i_'–cornpen_sation under other heads, it is noticed that the
if has awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards pain and
3»
:%
suffering and if the said amount is adjusted towards other
heads wherein the claimants contend that there is sheortfall,
that will take care of the said amount and as .
shall not be treated as compensation…under_7the" pain i"
and suffering but for the other heads.
4. The enhanced
with interest at the same Elgddelllllafded by
the Tribunal. The amour1t_ h’eivV.iVAd.e_phosited by the
Insurance weeks from the
date of wOn deposit the same
shall be l
5. In the appeal stands disposed
of, No order to costs. V