' _Bar'§g%11(;;'e-5630 061;" """ " 'V
V" Sri f . R. Bhagat, Advocate)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 35'"? DAY OF NOVEMBER. 2010";
: PRESENT :
THE HON'BLI:3 MR. JUs19teE:'.i$r;K. iiA_Afi:'.V , "
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE. fi;$.KEiwmm5zA
M.m.N<5. :2: eff 26¢?
Between:
The Nati0na.i"1f:su:ar;ice Q
Company Limited, '
Near Cane.araV"Ban1§;;;.__ _
MarathVahal'li',~ _ ' _
BangaI'Ore----.5E0 U1 _ ..
Represented by Au'Ujorise_d"~Of1'icer,
The I3anga--IQ1'e ReVgi0f;a1»~Of'fice.
No.14L_4_, shurehamma complex,
M.G.._;Road,
. .. Appellant
1. Sri... Nzgwexl Kishore Jaiswal,
TS/0."Lé1{e Narayan Prasad Jaiswali
" Aged about 59 years.
' Sfnt. SarojJa1'swai
: W/0. Nawal Kishore.
Aged 52 years.
g ,
K '_____r»,. .,.V»-------
,5
Tribunal, Metropolitan Area. Bangalore, (SCCH--14}, (for
short, 'Tribunai' ) for reduction of compensation V. on the
ground that, the cornpensation of .
in favour of the claimants as against gfoezj it
39000 Lakhs, is on the highei*;":.sid'e
reduced.
2. respondents
No.1 a.nd of the deceased
1\/Ianisilvtt claim petition under
SectiQh”‘-$08 of’ Act, contending that
at about .oniT.’.28–04–2005, when the deceased
. it wast” riding cycle bearing No.KA–03/ EC~6’I/19,
the traffic rules, on the left side of the
road, he with an accident near KMF Bus stop,
vV””Marath’aha11i, on account of rash and negligent driving
driver of Lorry bearing Registration No.CNX–
__5-‘f43- Due to the impact, he was thrown out and he
sustained grievous injuries and was immediately shifted
to St. John’s Hospital and in spite of best treatment, he
succumbed to the iI1j’t1i’i€S in the Hospital.
3. The claim petition
respondents 1 and 2 hereinl”ea?1*ne
before the Tribunal. The
Tribunal, after material
available on of the oral and
documentarsz claim petition in
part, W under different
heads, “per annum. from the date of
petition gptillllthe ‘date ‘of realization. Being aggrieved by
lathe of cornpensation awarded by Tribunal. the
“-Fnsii;11anee._iCotmpany has presented this appeal, seeking
redaction of’compensation.
4;”. Learned counsel appearing for insurer
Veheriiently submitted that the Tribunal seriously erred
.- I if
‘”ii*i taking the age of the deceased for adopting the
multiplier for ealeulatirig the compensation payable
towards loss of dependency, instead of taking’-.into
account the age of the younger parent of
Therefore, having regard to the agemofgroiingerpareiit’
the deceased in the instant the.’v_’approp1:iate”‘~.
multiplier applicable is ‘l3′ afidraecordingiyad V
the said multiplier, i’ea_son_aIole e-Ieorhpensatdionddd may be
awarded by modifying the and
aWard51.:)a§2§’gd’ha”x§e’l1learnedV couiisel for Insurance
Companflypy V ._ appearing for
respondents dforconsiderable length of time.
5 6′. After yoritdical eyaluation of the original records
threadbare, and after perusal of the
award passed by Tribunal, the only point
thatiarise for our consideration is:
lzlfhether the Compensation awarded by
.?5Tribur1aI is liable to be reduced?
After careful evaluation of the original recordsj”pi.acge’d
before us. it emerges that the o(:(:u1″re1ic:e-dot’accident? V’
and the resultant death of the”deceas_ed_.l.are<_notflin-.g
dispute. T he Tribunal, after "oral
documentarv evidence availatile on '–.file,_"gha's lriflhtl V
– ‘V ._ _ i Y
assessed the monthlyg ‘deceased at
eaooo/~ and rightly’ ll towards the
personal and deceased. but
slipped the multiplier. It
has “age of the deceased for
adopting per the decision of the Apex
Court-in of ju-dglrnents including the decision in
.ll”Sal1.’la Veniiejs case’ (2009 ACJ 1298), the age of the
of the deceased is to be taken into
coIi’sidei”at_io’n for adopting multiplier. in the instant
the age of the younger parent, mother, was 50
ll at the time of death of deceased. Therefore, we
“adopt: multiplier of ‘l3’ as against multiplier of ‘I?’
adopted by ‘1″‘ribuna.1. Accordingly, We reedetermine
compensation payable towards loss of dependeney:-Vpat_4
?4,e8.o0o/- (i.e. 2=3.0oo/- x 12 x 13) as against a
$6, 12,000/~ awarded by Tribunal.”
7. However, having TV regard thleV_-‘facts it
circumstances of the case the
deceased was embalmed and ._ bo wash packed
and air~lifted for last Tribunal
has rightly awarded $15,000/-towards
loss of loss of love and
affection ?25,000/- towards
transpolrtation ‘ and funeral expenses.
Henoe.’v it interference.
I:ln.«_the of the facts and circumstances of
clasve;-«.cvy»’.as:’s’t.at.ed above, the appeal filed by the
lnsii:–ran1ce~C’ompany is allowed in part. The impugned
and award dated 2891 December 2006,
in M.V.C.No.6’758/2005, by the XVI Additional
Hftidge. Niember, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Metropolitan Area, l3a,z1gaio1″e, {SCCH-14), is hereby
modified, reducing the total compensation
?6,67,000/~ awarded by Tribulzal, to m3.;t¢oo;,rp_
(reduction being 31,44,000/–), with interes:t_A’_jatvVk§%._per
annum. from the date of p€'[:iAtiO1:’1,.’_£1511′-_>{.h’E’–:d8.’t(ii’HVQ:f
realization. The breakup ise’a_§3 folfonfsz
Towards Loss of Dependency % ”::g68,ooo/u
Towards Loss of love and affecfion’ ‘? 15~,~OOO/~
Towards Loss of estate? ‘.los;_sv 15,000/~
expectancy ‘ 9 ‘
Towards transportation. _ of V ” ” 25.0OO/.~
body and fur15I’a1»;§XI3e:n55%s’ ~
5.23.000/~
The—.ICo.mpany..igdirected to deposit the
remaining” com’pe§;:stau§51at;’xmth interest thereon at 6%
per annurf1q?vithvi’11_t;o§,1i’Vtf{z’eeks from the date of receipt of
V. copy 5’of _judgrne.I1_t. and award.
The happortionment: and the manner of
t’d1sburser1@.er1tjof compensation made by Tribunal get
proporti_onate1y reduced to the extent of reduction of
.. _. ., ]COr¥1_p€nsa_tio11 mad this Court.
X ..,_»–»—-~–*-“*°*””‘
1
/
Ea
The amount in depesit by the Insurancfi: Company
shall be transmitted to the jturisdictionaljj M
forthwith .
Office to draw award, acc@rdi’ng£3z_.
V % V tffi~=_.»t.}udg3
sai-it
BMW’