On appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act challenging a compensation award, the High Court affirmed the amount granted by the Tribunal after finding the income assessment and calculation proper, dismissing the appeal.
The appeal was dismissed and the impugned judgment and award were confirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
M.F.A. NO.100236/2017 (MV)
Between:
Hubballi, Dist : Dharwad.
Dist : Dharwad.
2
… Appellants
(By Sri Dinesh M.Kulkarni, Advocate)
And:
of the vehicle R/o : H.No.65, Raj Nagar, Near Ashok Nagar, Behind Police Chowki, Hubballi, Dist : Dharwad.
… Respondents
(By Sri G.S.Mot, Advocate for R1; Sri M.Y.Katagi, Advocate for R2)
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, praying to modify the judgment and award passed by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Hubballi, dated 07.10.2016 in MVC No.38/2014 by enhancing the compensation.
This appeal coming on for Admission this day, Hanchate Sanjeevkumar J. delivered the following:-
3
JUDGMENT
The present appeal is preferred by the
appellants/claimants under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short ‘M.V.Act’), calling in question the judgment and award dated 07.10.2016 passed in MVC No.38/2014 by the court of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Hubballi (for short ‘the Tribunal’) so far as enhancement of compensation.
2. Brief facts of the case are as follows :-
It is stated that on 21.03.2012 at about 10.20 pm
the deceased Vittal was standing by the side of the road near Gujaratha Bhavan Cross, Deshpande Nagar, Hubli, by that time a car bearing Reg.No.KA-25/Z-0019 came from New Cotton Market side towards Ashok Nagar and lost control over the same thereby dashed against the deceased Vittal and the deceased has sustained grievous injuries on the vital part of his body and immediately he was taken to KIMS Hospital, Hubli for treatment but
4
during the course of treatment the deceased succumbed to the injuries and therefore the appellants being the legal heirs of the deceased have filed claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V.Act and the Tribunal after considering the evidences on record has granted a compensation of Rs.17,00,000/- with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till its realization.
appellants/claimants submitted that the Tribunal has not considered the monthly income of the deceased as per the evidence on record and considered the monthly income on lower side resulted into awarding of lesser amount of compensation.
awarded on the other conventional heads also is on lower side therefore, he prays for enhancement of compensation.
5
amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is proper and justified and hence there is no need to call for interference of the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, therefore prays to dismiss the appeal.
6
2012-2013 that the deceased has declared the income at
Rs.10,48,828/- per annum. Thus, the Tribunal has considered the average of the income of these years, which are just three years prior to date of accident and upon considering the average income of these three years the Tribunal has held that the deceased was having income of Rs.10.00 lakhs per annum, the average which would come to Rs.12,000/- per month. Therefore, the Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased at Rs.10.00 lakhs per annum (Rs.12,000/- per month) as per the evidence on record. Therefore, the finding of the Tribunal in this regard cannot be found fault with.
7
deceased had left two dependents, who are the wife and the unmarried daughter therefore 1/3rd amount was deducted towards personal and living expenses of the deceased and thus, applying the multiplier of ‘13’ as the age of the deceased is 50 years and accordingly granted a compensation of Rs.14,35,200/-. Therefore, upon considering all the evidences on record and the relevant factors as discussed above, the Tribunal has correctly assessed the income of the deceased from the documentary evidences as produced by the appellants/ claimants and has rightly awarded a compensation of Rs.14,35,200/- under the head 'loss of dependency' which calls no interference therefore the same is confirmed.
8
justified and therefore on this count also there is no call for interference by this court. The Tribunal has correctly awarded compensation of Rs.16,60,200/- and upon making rounding it as Rs.17,00,000/- and accordingly awarded compensation. Therefore, the compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal is found to be correct, proper and justifiably which needs no interference. Therefore, the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal does not call for any interference. The appeal is found to be devoid of merits and it is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following :
ORDER
9
iii) No order as to costs.
iv) Draw award accordingly.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
sn
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal calling for enhancement under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act requires interference?
Whether the income assessment and compensation calculation by the Tribunal are correct?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and othersReferred¶7
National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Smt. Vijaylaxmi W/o Vittal Katwe and others
Dr. Vasant S/o Krishna Ravankar
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
G. Narendar
Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
