IN" TH 1:: HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA
CIRCUIT BENCH mi GULIEBARGA 4 V 4'
DA'I'1'§I) THIS 'r1»~I£«: 281" 113m' 01? SE3'P'1'EMBE3R..~«2{)_1 'r
raxzrorara , AT/1"'
TI-IE3 HON'BLE MRJUSTICEV..JA(}ANNA'A1I'§;iANV _ 1'
M.F.A.No.3oo9ilztaoefmir)7,' A
M.F.A.No.3009'2r/F2009 .(1x.5\_r'}=, A
-Aif1ii'M.F.ALN'o.3bo91/2009
BETWEEN: A . "
United India Insurance '
Company Limite_d,"«,_ _. ~
Bijapur Divisionixl C);ifi'(:.a,., _ A'
Rep. By its Diivisiqineii",EV§ar1age1'{'=V V' A '
Dr. 13.3. Paul, Sangrggm Bui1dAi~n;;,.,_ i
SS. Fr0ni"R0a(;1,7Bijarfiur. : Appeliant
[By Shri. A3'./_iai1ye1:c:§rkrfirédrdy;A-Ad1{bCa1;e)
AND: A % A A A
" V. S1fi'.5gRa€i11app2i, A'
" S/A0. Kaila ' pa Malagi, Aged abouic 34 years,
Srrm.' S,i1ndamb_&i,
'W/0. RaC'kra}53jé1 Maiagi,
Aged a130L_1'1}'..--¢IL9 years.
Boih sire resiclems of Aland,
v Dis1;131::i:.3~Gu}barga and also
3 , A' 'Re.$id1"r£g at 940, Ashok Chowk.
'' _ 'N¢v§rP2Lr1chapethe1, Soiapur.
A 3. Elndia Cargo Movers,
No.36. 11 Floor. SI'iI1iV-'E}.S Nz;Lga1".
2;' Fifizzaiiza,
¥\J
80 feet. Road, Ba11ga1ore~56. : Respondenis
[By Shri. Guru M. Pafil, Advocate for' R»1 SI R2
Notice to R-8 is dispensed with VCO Dt.28.09.10]
';{'his M.¥'.A. filed U/S. '173{1} of the Motor Vehicle Act
against. the JL1dgme1'1t, and award dated 04.10.2008 1):-issed in
MVC. No.37?/2004 on the file of the III Addi.tio11.£1I f).ist'rj.c0t.V_e1nd
Sessions Judge & member, MAC'?-IV, Bijapur, Partly"zi11oWin.g"1:11e
claim petition for compensation of Rs.8,70,600/-. 0" ' ~ " :_.
BETWEEN:
United India Insurance
Company Limited,
Bijapul' Divisiorkal Office,
Rep. By its Divisional Ma113ger, _
Dr. B.S. Patil, Sangam Buflding, _
S.S. Front Road, Bijapur; E , :'~--.Appe11ant
(By Shri. Manvendra Roddy", A0
AND:
1. Firojkhétng _ _ _ '
S / 0. .Mahaboobkhan ' Pat.]1a11,
Age§;1'ab_out 54. years. '
' Wfo. F':ro3kh%1n_Pathan,
' A.ged':1bo_ui. 46 years,
'Both are f_esi.de'I1ts of No.672,
New Parzehapetha. Solapur.
Indi.a"Cz§'1"go Movers.
H *N:o.,'36. NI} Floor. SI'iI'1iVElS Nagar.
_ feel, Road, Ba11gaEore~56. : Respondents
reyfshri. G-urn M Patil. A_dmca-re for R1 & R2
~ Notice to R-3 is dispe1’1secIwiEh vco i”)1:.28.09. :03
MFA; 1N«$’gj3oo:9’J2 A/2(:)”o9 V
This l\/l.F.A. filed U/S. l73[l] oi’ the Motor Vehicle Act.
against the Judgment and award dated 04.10.2008 passed in
MVC. No.42?/2004 on E’..l”l€ file of the ill Additional l)is’r1fii:t and
Sessions Judge 8: member. MAC’i’~lV, Bijapur. Partly alloxx%’i–ii1giVthe
Claim peti’r.io1’1 for eornpensat.ion oi’ Rs.3.2’7._400/««. ‘ L’ A’ V.
These appeals are coming on for orders. th.iS_ld.ay;._:the Clot-.rt
delivered the following: ._
JUDGMENT’ i A
Both these appeals arise oneand
rendered by the Motor Aeeident_.(ilai1ns_»_»Tribt1.nalfAl\f;? Bijapur in
MVC. Nos 372/2004 81 The insurance
company«2″<' respomient. :;is'll.t.he appellant. In
both these is called in
questionv_asVexeees.ii{Ve:ll are disposed of finally,
with consent of thfs;l«earr1e'ClV eO_L1ns_el for the parties.
2_. 2009 pertains to the compensation
digit] the MACT. erred in not deducting' 50% out of
theii1eon1e*V7'offthe deceased towards his personal and living
fexpe:1se.s;flVas the deceased happens to be a bachelor and
lfseeoiidly,the mu.1t:iplier l6. applied was also wrong because. the
of niother of the deceased being 45 to be corisidered to
reclv<.o11 the eomper1sat.ior1 payable towards 'loss of deperidencyl
is»
2' «
4
The above submissions are not seriously disputed by the learned
Counsel for the elainiantzswespondente.
8. Tlierefore. taking the income of the deceased at
Rs.2700/– per month, applying the multiplier 14. he1\¥ing”–regard
to the age of mother of the deceased as the
Compensation payable towards ‘loss of depe-nden’eyl” af1;lerF…
deducting 50% of the income tovia1’ds’«pe–rso;nal” «and’~7ljvi’I1g T
expenses, would be Rs.2,26.8QO/–
Rs.2,26.800/~) as against Rs.8, ». V. =.Th’eTo’o1n'{§e’nsat1ion of
Rs.25,000/r awarded by the Tri§)’uiia.l* tinder other conventional
heads remains unchangedf V
4. la Niraehel.eor…_ note of the above submission, which is not
seriodtiisiyv.elis’pL1tfedV by the learned counsel for the respondents«
-Velainu-1111.18″;intéhis case also. taking the ineorne of the decreased, as
lllassesséect the Trib’L1r1.al at Rs.2,700/– and taking the age of the
._jn’1″e–therA of the deceased as 42 years. deducting 50% of the income
the deceased towards personal and lixririg expenses and
he.»
were
R’
applying the mu1t,ip1ier 14. the compensation payabie towards
‘loss of dependency’ would comes to Rs.2,26,800/~ (Rs. X 12
x M m Rs.2,26.800/W) as against: Rs.3,02.-400/-.
ctoinpensation of Rs.25,000/- eiwetrded by the 1du’1c’!_erV’
other Conventional heads remaineci Lira-[¥a1E:ei’e;oo91/2009 {MVC.
No.372/2004) 3(§:o’9,2 /$069 “{M1§fA.t1N;3′.2;2–*?/2004) is determined
at Rs.2,51.8(‘5Q./4::. (13uoVees«.V’Vttx}’o.:Vlakhe; fift.y one thousand eight
ht1ndred:t,on1y} V.emQL1nt shall Carry interest at 6% per
annum. exe.es;*~:Venio1;”r1{‘ if any, shall be refunded to the
appe112;n.t~ins’u1’a;:1ee””eoiigtpany and the statutory amount
depoe§itedE””beft5:=e this shall be transmitted to the concerned
‘vA1\r1’AQ.”i’q.VodA ” dd
so/-V
EEDGE