Partly allowed

Bharathbai W/O Late Babu Udgere v. Maruthi S/O Bandappa Pujari Ors.

Karnataka HC16 Oct 2014MFA/30735/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A First Miscellaneous Appeal against the High Court Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award of compensation. The Bench enhanced the total compensation by Rs.1,59,000 across heads of loss of dependency, consortium, love and affection, and estate, and awarded interest at 9% p.a.

What did the court decide?

Entitled to additional Rs.1,59,000 with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of the petition. Share determination to be done by Tribunal.

Bharathbai W/O Late Babu Udgere Vs Maruthi S/O… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

MFA 30735/11

¶2

¶3

THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA GULBARGA BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2014

¶5

BEFORE:

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.PACHHAPURE

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.30735 OF 2011 [MV]

BETWEEN

1. BHARATHBAI

W/O LATE BABU UDGERE

AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE-HOLD

¶12

ASHWANI D/O LATE BABU UDGERE AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD

¶13

ANURADHA D/O LATE BABU UDGERE AGE; 15 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT

¶14

REKHA D/O LATE BABU UDGERE AGE: 08 YEARS,

¶15

THE APPELLANT NO 3 & 4 ARE MINORS U/G OF THEIR MOTHER APPELLANT NO 1 AND THEY ARE R/O VIDHYANAGAR COLONY BIDAR

¶16

TIPPAMMA W/O RAMANNA AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR R/O HUDGI, TQ.HUMNABAD DIST :BIDAR

MFA 30735/11

6. RAMANNA

S/O LALAPPA AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR R/O HUDGI,TQ.HUMNABAD DIST: BIDAR, NOW AT AMLAPUR ... APPELLANTS

¶21

(BY SMT. UMADEVI K. BABSHETTY, ADV. FOR SRI. SHARANABASAPPA K BABSHETTY, ADV.)

¶22

AND

¶23

MARUTHI S/O BANDAPPA PUJARI AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER R/O POST NAGAIDLAD, TQ: CHINCHOLI, DIST:GULBARGA

¶24

MD. ISMAIL S/O ABDUL RAHEEM SAB AGE: MAJOR OCC BUSINESS R/O H.NO.15-1-503, OLD FEELKHANA, HYDERABAD (AP) NOW R/O POST CHANDAPUR TQ: CHINCHOLI, DIST: GULBARGA (OWNER OF LORRY)

¶25

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., OPP: MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA MAIN ROAD, GULBARGA ... RESPONDENTS

¶26

(BY SRI. MANJUNATH M. SHETTY, ADV. FOR SRI. UDAY P. HONGUNTIKAR, ADV. FOR R3 R1 & R2 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

¶27

¶28

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:25.11.2010 PASSED IN MVC NO.119/2008. ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER FTC-I & ADDL. M.A.C.T. AT BIDAR,

¶29

MFA 30735/11

¶30

¶31

PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶32

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

The appellants dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded for the death of Babu, the husband of the 1^st appellant in the motor vehicle accident have filed this appeal, seeking

¶35

enhancement.

¶36

The facts reveal that Babu [deceased] was

¶37

proceeding on the motor cycle on 15.04.2007 and the lorry bearing reg. No.AP-12/T-6521 came from the opposite direction and hit him. Thereby, he sustained severe injuries and died on the spot. His wife, 3 daughters and parents made a claim for compensation towards loss of dependency, loss of consortium, love and affection, etc.

¶38

MFA 30735/11

¶39

¶40

After recording the evidence, the Tribunal has

¶41

granted a total compensation of Rs.5,16,000-00 with

¶42

interest at 6% p.a. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, present appeal is filed.

¶43

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶44

The point that arises for my consideration

¶45

is;

¶46

Whether the appellants are entitled to enhancement of compensation? If so, to what extent?

¶47

Learned counsel for the appellants submits

¶48

that the assessment of income is on the lower side

¶49

and reasonable compensation has not been awarded on all the heads. Hence he seeks enhancement.

¶50

On the other hand, learned counsel for the insurer supports the Judgment and Award and submits that just and reasonable compensation has been

¶51

MFA 30735/11

¶52

¶53

granted on the basis of the material placed on record.

¶54

Though the deceased was a security guard

¶55

and the salary certificate was produced at Ex.P6, wherein Rs.8,000-00 was being paid as salary to the deceased, for non-examination of the employer of the deceased, the Tribunal has assessed his income at Rs.3,000-00 p.m. The deceased was serving in a private company and there was no difficulty for the appellants to examine the person who issued the certificate and also to prove the salary on the basis of the wage register, etc. Having not done so, I do not think that the salary mentioned in the certificate could be considered as the income of Babu [deceased].

¶56

Anyhow, in respect of the accident of the

¶57

year 2007, income is considered at Rs.4,000-00 p.m. even in the Lok Adalaths and that could be a

¶58

criteria to assess the income of the deceased. Accepting the said sum as the income of the

¶59

MFA 30735/11

¶60

¶61

deceased, the net compensation payable towards loss of dependency would be;

¶62

Rs.3,000-00 p.m. [after deducting 1/4^th towards

¶63

personal expenses] x 12 x 15 = Rs.5,40,000-00].

¶64

The Tribunal has granted only a sum of Rs.4,86,000-00 on this head and therefore, the appellants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs.54,000-00 on this head. Only a sum of Rs.10,000-00 has been granted towards loss of consortium. The 2^nd appellant who is the widow was aged 24 years at the time of the incident. She has got 3 daughters, who are appellants 2 to 4 herein. There are no chances of her re-marriage. Therefore, reasonable compensation has to be awarded towards loss of consortium. I think it would be just and proper to grant a sum of Rs.60,000-00 in addition to the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of consortium. Only a sum of Rs.15,000-00 is granted towards loss of love and affection for the claimants 2 to 6. Even at the rate of 10,000-00 for each, a

¶65

MFA 30735/11

¶66

¶67

sum of Rs.50,000-00 is payable towards loss of love and affection. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to an additional sum of Rs.35,000-00 towards loss of love and affection. No compensation is granted towards loss to the estate. A nominal sum of Rs.10,000-00 is just and proper on this head. The compensation awarded towards funeral expenses appears to be just and reasonable. Therefore, the appellants are entitled to the following:

¶68

		Rs. Ps.
Loss of dependency.	:	54,000-00
Loss of consortium.	:	60,000-00
Loss of love and affection.	:	35,000-00
Loss to the estate.	:	10,000-00
Total	:	1,59,000-00

¶69

The appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.1,59,000-00 with interest at 9% p.a. in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, the point is answered in affirmative.

¶70

MFA 30735/11

¶71

¶72

Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.1,59,000-00 in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of the petition till its payment. The share of the appellants in the enhanced compensation shall be determined by the Tribunal.

¶73

Sd/JUDGE. Ksm*

Bharathbai W/O Late Babu Udgere v. Maruthi S/O Bandappa Pujari Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharathbai W/O Late Babu Udgere v. Maruthi S/O Bandappa Pujari Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Vs Smt.Laxmi @ Anjana Devi

Icici Lombard Gen. Ins, Co.,Ltd, Vs Peerappa S/O Dhulappa Dharigond and Otrs

Manjunath @ Manjugouda S/O Yamunappa Gouda Vs B.S. Biradar S/O Shanta Gouda Biradar and Anr.

Baba S/O Saheb Lal Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Rizwan Begum D/O Rasool Sab Shahapur Vs Nirmala W/O Manohar Mani

Dastagirsab S/O Ameensab Alamela Vs Shabbir Ahmed S/O Dastgirsab Doddamani