Sangeeta Vs. Ramachandra And Ors - Court Judgment

1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE20H DAY OF OCTOBER2020PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.KRISHNA BHAT MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.202263/2017 (MV) Between: Sangeeta W/o Bhimashankar Rokade Age:

45. Years, Occ: H.H.work R/o Nandur, Tq. Mangalwedha Dist. Solapur, now, R/o Shakti Nagar Vijayapur-586 101 … Appellant (By Sri Biradar Viranagouda, Advocate) And:

1. Ramchandra S/o Kishanrao Patil Age:

45. Years, Occ: Business R/o Bhatkheda Post. Vhatangali Tq. & Dist. Latur, Maharastra State-413 232 2. The Branch Manager New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Hanamashetty Building, Gurukula Road Vijayapur-586 101 Cover Note No.982175 Valid from 15-10-2012 to 14-10-2013 2 3. Divisional Controller MSRTC, Bhudavar Peth Solapur, 413 001 Bus No.MH-14/BT-2717 … Respondents (Sri Manvendra Reddy, Advocate for R2; Sri Rahul R. Asture, Advocate for R3; Notice to R1 Served) This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173 (1) of Motor Vehicles Act, praying to allow this appeal by modifying the judgment and award passed by the IV Addl. District & Sessions Judge and MACT No.XIII, Vijayapura dated 29.11.2016 in MVC No.568/2013. This appeal coming on for Admission this day, P.Krishna Bhat J., delivered the following: JUDGMENT

This is a claimant/first wife’s appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by judgment and award dated 29.11.2016 in MVC No.568/2013 by the learned MACT, Vijayapura.

2. Brief facts are that, on 18.03.2013 at about 12.15 a.m. when the deceased-Bhimashankar Rokhade and two others were traveling in a Bus bearing Regn.No.MH-14/BT-2717 and the Bus was parked on 3 the extreme side of the road, the offending Truck bearing Regn.No.MH-24/AB-6611 came in a rash and negligent manner from the hind side and dashed to the bus and due to the impact injuries deceased- Bhimashankar Rokhade died and two others suffered grievous injuries. The claim petition filed by the present appellant as the first wife and MVC No.1455/2013 filed by the second wife and the child born to the second wife came to be allowed by awarding a total compensation of Rs.16,14,000/- with interest thereon at 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till the date of payment.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Tribunal was in error in excluding from consideration the award of compensation under the head of ‘loss of future prospects’ in life on the ground that the deceased who was a Conductor in MSRTC would be in service only for a future period of 07 years 03 months, he being aged 4 close to 53 years and therefore his age entailing application of multiplier of ‘11’, he would already have received just compensation under the head of loss of dependency and awarding of further compensation under the head of loss of future prospects in life would have led to granting of compensation which would not be in consonance with the principles of award of just compensation. He, therefore, submitted that the standard applied by the learned Tribunal in regard to computing compensation is improper and accordingly same is liable to be set aside and higher compensation is liable to be awarded.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the insurance company, per contra, submitted that while it is true that in cases of death, the claimants/ dependents are entitled to award of compensation by factoring in a component under the head of loss of future prospects in life, in this particular instance, the 5 learned Tribunal has already awarded excessive compensation under the conventional heads in a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- and therefore denial under the head of loss of future prospects in life is offset by awarding higher compensation under conventional heads. In sum and substance, he submits that no interference with the award made by learned Tribunal is warranted in this particular instance and the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

5. We have carefully perused the judgment under consideration before us. We see from the same that learned Tribunal has calculated the components of award of compensation under various heads as follows; “ The petitioners are entitled for the compensation amount under the relevant heads as under: To the first wife Smt. Sangeeta 1. Loss of dependency Rs.4,62,910-00 2. Loss of Consortium of Rs.50,000-00 Married life 6 3. Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses Rs.25,000-00 -------------------- Total : Rs.5,37,910-00 It is rounded of to : Rs.5,38,000-00 To the second wife Smt. Kavita 1. Loss of dependency : Rs.4,62,909-00 2. Loss of love and affection : Rs.50,000-00 Total: Rs.5,12,909-00 ------------------- Rounded off to : Rs.5,13,000-00 To the son of deceased Promod aged 2 years:

1. Loss of dependency : Rs.4,62,909-00 2. Loss of love and affection : Rs.50,000-00 3. Loss of care & guidance : Rs.50,000-00 of minor child ----------------- Total : Rs.5,62,909-00 ------------------ Rounded off to : Rs.5,63,000-00 6. The above shows that, in sum, learned Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of 7 Rs.2,25,000/- under the conventional heads. The development of law regarding grant of compensation under conventional heads from the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in AIR2017SC5157to the case of New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Somwati reported in [2020 SCC OnLine SC720 discloses that the calculation and award of compensation under the said head involves identification of three classes of relations left behind by the deceased namely, parents, children and the spouse. The law in this country cannot countenance plurality of spouses for the purpose of mulcting the insurer with higher compensation merely because the deceased had fancied to take multiple spouses and sire children through them. Law can only permit the apportioning of the compensation arrived at on the application of the standard principles among such dependents on per capita basis at the most. Therefore, particularly taking into the 8 consideration the fact that the deceased has left behind two wives and a son we are of the considered opinion that grant of Rs.1,10,000/- (20,000 + 20,000 for two wives, Rs.40,000/- to son + Rs.30,000 towards funeral expenses and loss of estate) under the conventional heads would have been more just and appropriate in this particular instance. No authority of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India or of this court taking a contrary view has been brought to our notice during the hearing. In that view of the matter, the excess amount awarded by the learned Tribunal under conventional heads namely Rs.1,15,000/- would have to be construed to have been awarded as compensation towards loss of future prospects in life. Therefore, we feel that taking a broad view of the matter, the learned Tribunal has done justice between the parties and total compensation awarded in a sum of Rs.16,14,000/- is the just compensation for the death of the deceased and 9 consequently, we do not feel the need to interfere with the same. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER

Above appeal is dismissed. The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the learned MACT, forthwith. The award amount shall be deposited by the respondent No.2-Insurer within eight weeks before the Tribunal from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. SD/- JUDGE SD/- JUDGE BL