I
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE} 23"") DAY OF N OVEIVIBER 2009
PRESENT:
THE HONBLE3 MRJUSTICE NKPATIL Q
AND
THE) HONBLE MRJUSTECE B.sREENIvAsE:.::G0wbA "
M.F.A.NO.l696 / §'»'.G'()5[I\/I'-fl H'
BETWEEN:
1 VANIVMURTHY
W/O LATE '1" s vENKATE:srV1_:\/;UVRTHY~ '
AGED ABOUT 44,.-YEARSJ' --. ' '
2 V KRUTHIKA D/G'
AGED ABOUT 14YE3ARS,f_ L
3 'r__I1I='.>.I.JAI:'5*1'*}.1V1-«.,[_)" /0 'LA*1-'E "»-TEINKATESH IVIURHTY
AGED ABO~UT. 1'G1..§'%:,A1ItéL1;AN"r..N0s. QIAND 3 ARE MINORS
» AND REP, By~--Mo1'HEIz AND NATURAL GUARDIAN.
* "AppE§,LAN1* N.o_;_.1.
A1,_1§IAR§:.i2f£;f 57, VISHWANATHARAO
MAIN ROAD", MADHAVANAGAR.
BAN(3--AL;ORE~ 1. APPELLANTS
I A[BIOj,?'*SI{I SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI 3: SRI.K.G.BHAT, Am/s.)
1 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD
R.O. SUBHARAM COMPLEX.
I44. M.G.ROAD.
4"'
/:2"
,;r
3'
f
BANGALORE ~ 580001
BY ITS MANAGER.
2 MR.N.SATISH KUMAR
S/O NAIARAJAN
R/AT M/S KARUR ROADWAYS.
HOSUR MAIN ROAD,
BMIALORE. -
3 NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.'=LTD';I ~ '
R.O. SUBNARANI COMPLEX '
NO.14»4,M.G.ROAD. _ '
BANGALORE I,
POLICY ISSUED IN BRANCH OFFICE _
AT BILGUNDIA-IANSION;" * '
STATION ROAD--,.__ .
OPPOSITE MINI VIDIIAN .
s5OIIIjIj~IA" .
4 MR.GQI.iINIDAR;A;I'""'7:. _
NO.4»?.
.
BAl\¥GALQ.RE. ‘ “L RESPONDENIS
{By SRIA/’ENKATESII:_R;.._E’I{AGAT, ADV. FOR R– 1 & R-3
NOTICE;-TOvR;3-__AND R.~~4 IS DISPESNSED WITH)
_DATI-IIS IVI”F–AVI__E_3__’.f~’ILE2D U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
«.ITI~IE:”;IL’I3:GI3/IENT AND AWARD DATED:03/06/2005 PASSED
IAI.N’»vNO_’;3.32/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE xv: ADDL.
“.JU’DGE;v~V’IjCOURT OF SMALL CAUSES & MEMBER, MACT.
METIIOPOLITAN AREA. BANGALORE, {SCCH–l4}. PARTLY
__ A ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
” _ ‘SEIENING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS I\/I.F.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY.
I N.K.PATIL, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
4
bearing registration No.KA–O4wN/1247 from Bangalore
to Sriranga. on Salem–Namakal Main Roadjdfiaédeié’lorry
bearing registration No.KA~O}.«AA/5658,
speed driven by its driver in’wa”‘ra_sl1 and’«.negli’gent
manner and there was head–on_’ Collision_’:betwee=ri”‘vthe.
two vehicles, as a re’sva_i:l’t;~. of “‘Vvh1Cl*i,.”1.:thVe said’
‘l’.S.Venkatesh lVIu.r’thy ” others sustained
grievous injuries and all h rglipécumbed to the
same on th€”S’i%7i:0§; =i
“the«udeath of said T.S.Venkatesh
Murthy in theviroAad._t’r”affi–e’accident, the appellants filed
the elailm ‘ Claiming Compensation of
Rs.,?.5,O0,(u)0Qv/=~Viagainst the respondents. The said
clairni petition V’h’ad—some up for consideration before the
:TE”i.VbL1_v1:’l8.1 The Tribunal, after hearing the
on both sides and after appreciation of
orallaind documentary evidence, allowed the claim
petlitioln. in part. awarding a compensation of
V. *Rs.i7,64,OOO/W with int/eirest at 6% per annum from the
.5
__ “_MN.e__…-~
3
date of petition till the date of realisation. Being
dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded
by the Tribunal. the appellants felt neeessitatj§{§”v.,4to
present this appeal seeking enha’n__ee§iieiitlll
compensation.
4. We have heard the leaifned co:u;11sel” fOrl”‘the».p
appellants and the l€.’:1I”l’1€(Z.l'”-»§%t’J”.1I1S€lV2fOf”?,l:1€.:’lI1SL1l’3e1’1C€
Company and perus-.e:d..j;he_’eri,t§inal.Vfeeords. ‘A it
the impugned judgment
and awardppand:lalttetlthbrdugh evaluation of the original
recerds axufailabie’ on file, the only point that arises for
.Qi;i’r cdnsidieration is,
A lliifheteher the compensation awarded
byf_.fh5e Tribunal isjust and reasonable?
it is an undisputed fact that the deceased
l”‘._l”ll’;S’;ll\?”enirs.’:v,’ Delhi In
Transport Corporation reported in 2009
Vrnultiplier applicable is *1 1′.
Acceptlngpp the’ we award Rs.l2,l0,000/–
(Rs.l.ppI0,tl0(lA/*,w.’v’x ‘ll Ildtowards loss of dependency as
d awarded by the Tribunal.
perusal of the irnpugned judgment and
award’ and the original records available on file, we are
.. the ‘opinion that the Tribunal has awarded just and
‘:_Vrea’sonable compensation towards other conventional
“heads and the same does call for i_nt.erference by this
.5’
2
if __ __w_J___,,,,.. M
__.r
E
Court.
8. For the foregoing reasons, the instant appeal
filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The iv13Vielp’iigned
judgment and atvard dated
M.V.C.No.332/2003 on the filemof t.hr3″‘}’~,.*”lf:l’_Vv }xdaia:Vio;jia1’sW
Judge, Court of Small Catises gand
Accident Claims Tribtinal.Kfiangggalores
modified by awarding COI]1VpYt§:f1v!:S_f:1t~l§)I1 oi’ 1V?§,70,OOO/~
as against Rs.7,64,0’Oflt/ Tribunal. The
enhanced con1*p_ensatio1″iidiot”A shall carry
interzvestlat from the date of petition till
the date ofrealisation.._:””i’l’i’e break up is as under:
1. Towardls igssw er dependency Rs. 12, 1o,o0o~oo
A 2′;l…j’l’o\:yr.ards loss’o’i'”‘c’o’nsortium Rs. 20,000~O0
‘ -To-wéarcis loss of love 81 affection Rs. 15,000-O0
~.4’..-.T£*o{2’var’d_s’tzransportatioii of
A Rs. 10,000-O0
5. ‘l”ov\}*ards funeral expenses Rs. l5,000~OO
Total Rs. 12,7o,ooo~oo
ll
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
l enhanced cornpensation with accrued interest. within a
8
period of four weeks from the date of receipt. of copy of
the judgment.
Out. of the enhanced compensation. of
Rs.1.50.000/– with proportionate
in Fixed Deposit in the name _o.f..a_ppellan’t’ Vila » or
Nationalised or Scheduled Bank. ram of
and renewable by another. _5’~..yearS’. withl’ pel’;n1i’ssi’on for V
her to withdraw ‘lathe :.int”ere’s1:._ aceru,ed/1 thereon.
periodically.
‘ of Rs.1.50.000/u. with
proportionate Vilrzterest;-«’sh’a1l be kept in Fixed Deposit in
{1_a1n_e of “ea£:hu0f appellant Nos.2 and 3, in any
:01’ Scheduled Bank. till they attain
l’majo1’ity.v;V’f§xo:th permission to appellant No.1~the mother
andnatttral guardian of the appellant Nos.2 and 3 to
Vpwlithdraxv the interest. accrued thereon quarterly. for the
lgwelfare of the children.
9
The remaining sum of
proporiiionate interest. shall be re1ease__d .:id:1V° éqiialy’
proportion in favour of a:pfit~:1’iant’..¢ 7
immedimely on deposit: by: the If;sLir;i11Ce
Office is directed to d1_f_zg3{w,V_t’t2.r;j_ aweird_a_ccQ§*d£ng1y.