Full Judgment
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4837 OF 2022 (MV-D) BETWEEN:
1. FARJAN BEGUM,
W/O LATE ABDUL ALEEM @ ALEEM SAB, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT CHIKKAHONNALA VILLAGE, DODDAKUNNALA POST, KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT 1ST CROSS, SIRA GATE, TUMKUR CITY - 572 106.
2. ADIL AHMED, S/O LATE ABDUL ALEEM @ ALEEM SAB, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, Digitally signed
by V KRISHNA RESIDING AT CHIKKAHONNALA VILLAGE, Location: High DODDAKUNNALA POST, Court of KADABA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK,Karnataka NOW RESIDING AT 1ST CROSS, SIRA GATE, TUMKUR CITY - 572 106.
3. SADIQ BANU, W/O MOHAMAD ANEEF D/O LATE ABDUL ALEEM @ ALEEM SAB, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT GEREHALLI VILLAGE, -2- OBLAPURA POST, KORA HOBLI, TUMKURU TALUK - 572 101. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHANTHARAJ K., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. SHAM, S/O DASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT 6TH CROSS, MARALURU DINNE, TUMAKURU CITY - 572 101.
2. UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD.,
BY ITS MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE, JAYADEVA COMPLEX, B H ROAD, TUMKURU - 572 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. NAGARAJAIAH., ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 12.03.2024 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH;) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2021 PASSED IN MVC
NO. 518/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MACT, TUMAKURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -3-
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by the claimants challenging the
judgment and award dated 30.11.2021 passed by II Additional
District Judge at MACT, Tumakuru (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in MVC.No.518/2020. This appeal is founded on the premise of inadequacy of compensation. Hence, the appellants seek enhancement of compensation.
2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are as under:
That on 15.03.2020 at 11.00 am, one deceased Aleem Sab @ Abdul Aleem was proceeding on his TVS XL moped bearing registration No.KA-06-ET-9225 in Gubbi - C.S.Pura road, during which time Honda Shine motor bike bearing registration No.KA-06-EV-7257 ridden by its rider in a rash and negligent manner with high speed, came and dashed against the motor bike of said Aleem Sab @ Abdul Aleem. Due to the impact of the vehicle, the said Aleem Sab @ Abdul Aleem fell down and sustained grievous injuries. He was shifted to Adithya Orthopedic and Trauma Centre and later shifted to -4- Nimhans Hospital, Bangalore, where he took necessary treatment and further he referred to Adithya Orthopedic and Trauma Centre, Tumakuru, where he succumbed to the injuries. The claimants, who are the legal representatives and dependents of deceased, filed claim petition seeking compensation. 3.1. On service of notice, respondent No.1 was placed ex-parte. Respondent No.2 filed statement of objection denied the claim of the claimant including age, avocation, income and sought for dismissal of the claim petition. 3.2. On the basis of pleadings, the tribunal framed relevant issues for consideration. 3.3. In order to substantiate the issues and to establish the case, the claimant got examined herself as PW.1 and another as PW.2 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to P15. On the other hand, respondents did not adduce evidence. 3.4. On the basis of material evidence, both oral and documentary and on hearing the submissions of learned counsel for both parties, the tribunal awarded compensation of -5- Rs.10,48,436/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization and also held that the respondent No.1 and 2 jointly and severally shall pay the compensation amount to the claimants and directed respondent No.2 to deposit the entire compensation amount before the tribunal within two months. 3.5. Being aggrieved by the meagre compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimants are before this Court challenging the impugned judgment and award.
4. The main contention of the learned counsel for
appellants-claimants is that, the tribunal has committed an error in awarding meagre compensation, which calls for interference at the hands of this Court. Accordingly, he seeks enhancement of compensation.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent-Insurance
Company submits that the tribunal has rightly awarded just and reasonable compensation, which does not call for interference. Therefore, on these grounds, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. -6-
6. The point that calls for consideration before this Court is: "Whether the claimants are entitled for enhancement of compensation? If so, what amount?”
7. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants and
learned counsel for respondent No.2, the occurrence of accident, involvement of the vehicle, death having occurred due to the accident are all established by production of Exs.P1 to P15. The age of the deceased is 60 years. The multiplier applied by the tribunal is '9' and the additional of 10% to the income awarded by the tribunal, do not call for any interference same is sustained. So also, the deduction of 1/3rd towards living and personal expenses of the deceased. What calls for interference is the income assessed by the tribunal Rs.11,000/- pm. The accident having occurred in the year 2020, the notional income for the year 2020 prescribed by the Legal Service Authority Chart is Rs.14,500/- pm. Hence, income is enhanced to Rs.14,500/- pm as against Rs.11,000/- adopted by the tribunal. Therefore, the loss of dependency would be Rs.11,48,472/- (Rs.14,500/- + 10% = Rs.15,950/- x 1/3 = -7- Rs.10,634/- x 12 x 9) as against Rs.8,71,236/- awarded by the tribunal.
8. Towards loss of consortium Rs.1,20,000/- is
awarded by the tribunal, an additional 10% would have to be added towards escalation of one block period as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in
(2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680. Therefore, Rs.1,32,000/- (Rs.1,20,000/- + 10%) is awarded under this head.
9. Towards medical expenses tribunal has awarded Rs.27,200/-. Same is retained.
10. Towards loss of estate and funeral expenses
together tribunal has awarded Rs.30,000/-, which also would be entitled to 10% escalation, which comes to Rs.33,000/- (Rs.30,000/- + 10%) is awarded under this head.
11. In view of the above, the claimants would be entitled
to a total compensation of Rs.13,40,672/- along with interest -8- at 6% p.a as against Rs.10,48,436/- as mentioned in the table below: Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency Rs. 11,48,472-00 Loss of consortium Rs.1,32,000-00 (+ 10% escalation) Loss of estate and funeral Rs.33,000-00 expenses. (+ 10% escalation) Medical expenses RS.27,200-00 TOTAL Rs.13,40,672-00
12. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed-in-part; ii) The judgment and award dated 30.11.2021 passed in MVC.No.518/2020 by II Additional District Judge at MACT, Tumakuru, is modified; iii) The claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.13,40,672/- along with interest at 6% p.a as against Rs.10,48,436/-; -9- iv) The compensation amount shall be paid by the
respondent No.2 -Insurance Company with interest at 6% per annum. The compensation amount shall be paid within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; v) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal shall stand intact with regard to deposit and apportionment. Sd/- JUDGE AM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25