Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6121 OF 2015 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6122 OF 2015 (MV-I) IN MFA No. 6121/2015 BETWEEN: SYED MUNAWAR S/O SYED MOHAMMED AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O MAIN ROAD, RML NAGAR SHIMOGA-577201. …APPELLANT (BY SRI.R. SHASHIDHARA., ADVOCATE) Digitally AND: signed by VANAMALA
N 1. RAMESH Location: S/O YAMUNAPPA High Court AGE MAJOR of DRIVER OF BUS BEARINGKarnataka NO.KA-14/A-6327, SRI KRISHNA MOTORS DURGAMMA STREET, SHIMOGA, R/O SIDDESWARANAGAR, MASUR (P) HIREKERUR TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581110. -2-
2. H.G.NARENDRAKAMATH S/O H.GOVINDAKAMATH AGE : MAJOR DRIVER OF BUS BEARING NO.KA-14/A-6327, ARYA DURGAMMA STREET SHIMOGA-577201.
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD P.B.NO.123, CHENNAGIRI ROAD, BHADRAVATHI-577301.
4. SARASWATHI W/O LATE CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE R/O NEAR GSKM N.T.ROAD SHIMOGA-577201. …RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.C. SHANKAR REDDY., ADVOCATE FOR R3; VIDE ORDER DATED 13.04.2016; NOTICE TO R1 & R2 IS DISPENSED WITH; NOTICE TO R4 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.09.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.1159/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT-2, SHIMOGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. -3- IN MFA NO. 6122/2015 BETWEEN: SYED MUNAWAR S/O SYED MOHAMMED AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O MAIN ROAD, RML NAGAR SHIMOGA-577201. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI.R. SHASHIDHARA., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. RAMESH
S/O YAMUNAPPA AGE MAJOR DRIVER OF BUS BEARING NO.KA-14/A-6327, SRI KRISHNA MOTORS DURGAMMA STREET, SHIMOGA, R/O SIDDESWARANAGAR, MASUR (P), HIREKERUR TALUK HAVERI DISTRICT-581110.
2. H.G.NARENDRAKAMATH S/O H.GOVINDAKAMATH OWNER OF KRISHNA BUS NO.KA-14/A-6327 SRI KRISHNA MOTORS, ARYA DURGAMMA STREET, SHIMOGA-577201.
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD
P.B.NO.123, CHENNAGIRI ROAD BHADRAVATHI-577301 ...RESPONDENTS -4- (BY SRI C. SHANKAR REDDY., ADVOCATE FOR R3; VIDE ORDER DATED 30.03.2016 NOTICE TO R1 & R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 3.9.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.1160/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, AMACT-2, SHIMOGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD) These appeals are filed calling in question the common Judgment and Award dated 03.09.2014 in MVC Nos.1159/2011 and 1160/2011. The claim petitions are because of a road accident on 23.03.2011. The claim petition in MVC No.1159/2011 is by the husband of Smt. Gayathri @ Shifa who has died because of a road accident on -5- 23.03.2011, and the claim petition in MVC No.1160/2011 is also by this Claimant for the injuries suffered by him in the same accident. The Claimant has filed these appeals for enhancement.
2. The Tribunal, in MVC No. 1159/20211,
has granted to the claimant and Smt. Gayathri @ Shifa’s mother a sum of Rs.4,19,000/- with interest at 6 % per annum from the date of the petition to the date of deposit under the following heads. This compensation is apportioned equally between the Claimant and Smt. Gayathri @ Shifa’s mother. Sl. No. Heads of compensation Amount [In Rs.]
1. Loss of dependency 3,84,000
2. Love and consortium 10,000
3. Transportation of body 15,000
4. Loss of Estate 10,000
TOTAL 4,19,000 The Tribunal has granted to the claimant in MVC No.1160/2011 a sum of Rs.3,60,000/- along with interest at 6% per annum under the following heads: -6- Sl. Heads of compensation Amount No. [In Rs.]
1. Pain and Suffering 40,000
2. Medical Expenses 1,96,000
3. Conveyance, attendance,
nutrition and other 15,000 incidental charges 4 Loss of earnings during treatment period 12,000 5 Loss of amenities 20,000 6 Loss of future income 76,800 TOTAL 3,59,800 Rounded off 3,60,000
2. The following fundamental facts are not
disputed. The claimant and Smt. Gayathri @ Shifa [who were married] were traveling on a motorcycle on 23.03.2011 with the claimant riding the motorcycle when the vehicle insured by the Insurer dashed against the two-wheeler. In this accident, the claimant suffered grievous injuries, and he was working as a Mechanic at the time of the accident. Smt. Gayathri @ Shifa [the Claimant's wife] has died with no children, but she was in the family way. The -7- deceased has died leaving behind the claimant and her mother, the claimant in MVC No. 753/20111]. IN MFA No. 6121/2015:
3. Sri R Shashidhara, the learned counsel for
the claimant, contends that there must be an enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the demise of Smt. Gayathri @ Shifa with a higher sum towards the loss of dependency taking a higher income with addition towards future prospects. The learned counsel also submits that this Court must interfere with the Tribunal’s decision to apportion compensation equally between him and the deceased’s mother and grant a higher sum towards loss of consortium. Sri C. Sankar Reddy, the learned 1 Smt. Gayathri @ Shifa’s mother filed her claim petition in
MVC No.753/2011 for compensation to her. The Tribunal has considered this Claim petition in MVC No. 753/2011 also by the impugned common judgment, and she is awarded 50% of the compensation awarded in MVC No. -8- counsel for the respondent - the Insurer, is heard in the light of this canvass for final disposal.
4. This Court must opine that the Tribunal
has taken the notional income of the deceased Smt. Gayathri @ Shifa as Rs.4,000/-, and in the cases arising out of the accidents in the year 2011, the loss of dependency is computed, when there is no proof of income, taking the notional income at Rs.6,500/-. The deceased was only 23 years and was in the family as on the date of the death. She was a Homemaker. In the circumstances, this Court opines that loss of dependency must be reworked taking the income of the deceased at Rs.6,500/- per month and the multiplier must be based on her age and her husband’s age. In which event, the multiplier will be '18'. There must also be an addition towards future prospects at 40%.
5. Further, this Court opines that, in the
facts and circumstances of the case, the deduction
-9- towards the deceased’s personal expenses must be computed thus, will be in a sum of Rs.9,82,800/-, and the computation as follows. Computation of Loss of Dependency [in Rs.] Monthly income of the deceased 6,500 Annual Income for Loss of 78,000 Dependency Addition towards future Prospects at 40% 31,200 Annual Income with Future prospects 1,09,200 Deduction at one half towards 54,600 personal expenses Annual Income after deduction towards personal expenses 54,600 Loss of dependency with multiplier of '18' 9,82,800 In addition, there must be award of loss of Consortium to the injured claimant and the deceased’s mother at Rs.40,000/- each and an Award in a sum of Rs.30,000/- under the conventional heads. This Court, on perusal of the reasons assigned by the Tribunal in paragraph-16 of the Judgment, is - 10 - not persuaded to opine that the apportionment between the claimant and the mother must be altered. In the result, they will be entitled to enhancement of compensation in a sum of Rs.6,73,800/- which is brought out by the following comparative table: By the Tribunal By this Court [in Rs.] [in Rs.]
Loss of dependency 3,84,000 9,82,800 Love and consortium 10,000 80,000 Transportation of 15,000 body 30,000 Loss of Estate 10,000 Total 4,19,000 10,92,800 Enhancement 6,73,800
IN MFA No. 6122/2015:
6. Sri. R Shashidhara, while canvassing for
enhancement without disputing the Tribunal's finding on the percentage of functional disability of the injured claimant, submits that this Court must grant higher compensation towards loss of future income taking the notional income of the deceased at Rs.6,500/- per month and the loss of income during - 11 - laid up period for three months. The learned counsel also further seeks enhancement in the Award towards loss of amenities. Sri C Shankar Reddy is heard in the light of this canvass.
7. This Court must opine, because it is
undisputed that the claimant was working as a Mechanic on the date of the accident and that the notional income when there is no proof actual income is taken at Rs.6,500/- in similar circumstances, that Sri R Shashidhara is justified in seeking re- computation of loss of future income for the disability of 10% applying the multiplier of '16' taking the income at Rs.6,500/- Further, the claimant will also be entitled to compensation towards loss of income during the three months of laid up period at Rs.,6,500/- per month.
8. Though Sri R Shashidhara seeks
enhancement in the amount awarded towards loss of amenities in the light of the injuries suffered, because - 12 - the injured claimant has not examined the Doctor, this Court is not persuaded to opine that there must be any enhancement. The computation of award to the claimant towards loss of future income granting a sum of Rs.1,28,8000/- as against Rs.76,800/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Computation is as follows.
Annual Income [Rs.6500 X 12] Rs.78,000/- Disability to whole body 10% Income after taking disability Rs.7,800/- Multiplier 16 Loss of future income Rs.1,24,800/- Amount awarded by Tribunal Rs.76,800/- Enhanced loss of future income Rs.48,000/-
The enhancement in compensation when so computed is as brought out by the comparative table reads as follows: By the By this Court Tribunal [in Rs.] [in Rs.] Pain and Suffering 40,000 40,000 Medical Expenses 1,96,000 1,96,000 Conveyance, attendance, nutrition 15,000 15,000 and other incidental - 13 - charges Loss of earnings during treatment 12,000 19,500 period Loss of amenities 20,000 20,000 Loss of future income 76,800 1,24,800 TOTAL 3,59,800 4,15,300 Enhancement 55,500 For the afore reasons, the following:
ORDER
[a] The appeals are allowed in part granting compensation directing the respondent- Insurance Company [in both the appeals] to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.6,73,800/- in MFA No.6121/2015 and Rs.55,500/- in MFA No.6122/2015 along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the respective claim petitions till the date of deposit within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Judgment. - 14 - [b] The Registry is directed to draw Award accordingly and transmit the Trial Court Records expeditiously. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SD/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE AN/-