Partly allowed

Smt Rathi K G v. Sri Nithish

Karnataka HC10 Nov 2022MFA/354/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal in part, enhancing the compensation award from approximately Rs. 17.37 lakhs to Rs. 24.53 lakhs. The court recalculated loss of dependency based on higher notional income and adjusted multipliers, and doubled the loss of love and affection award citing Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

The judgment and award of the Tribunal are modified to grant an enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,15,862/- with interest.

Smt Rathi K G Vs Sri Nithish — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶6

M.F.A.No.354/2018 (MV - D)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. RATHI K.G., W/O.A.C.KAVERAPPA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, MOTHER OF THE DECEASED DEVAIAH A.K., R/AT # D.NO.25, M.BADAGA, MURNAD VILLAGE & POST, MADIKERI TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT – 571 252.

¶9

A.C.KAVERAPPA, S/O LTE CHENGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, FATHER OF THE DECEASED DEVAIAH A.K, R/AT # D.NO.25, M.BADAGA, MURNAD VILLAGE & POST, MADIKERI TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT.

¶10

… APPELLANTS

¶11

(BY SRI.HAREESH BHANDARY J., ADVOCATE)

¶12

AND:

¶13

SRI. NITHISH, S/O BALAKRISHNA RAI K.M, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, R/AT KOTRAGADDE HOUSE, NETTANIGE MUDNOOR VILLAGE, KARNOOR POST, PUTTUR TQ. D.K.DISTRICT – 574 204.

¶14

¶15

THE BRANCH MANGER, THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., OPP. ARUNA TALKIES, PUTTUR TALUK, D.K.DISTRICT.

¶16

… RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. KIRAN R., ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI.Y.ARUNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶18

THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 31/03/2017, PASSED IN MVC NO.1050/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., & MEMBER, MACT, PUTTUR, D.K., PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶19

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

This appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants

¶22

under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'MV Act' for short), challenging the judgment and award passed in MVC No.1050/2016 dated 31.03.2017 by the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge & Member, MACT, Puttur, D.K., seeking enhancement of the compensation.

¶23

The brief facts of the case are that on

¶24

01.05.2016 at about 5.15 p.m., the deceased - Devaiah

¶25

¶26

A.K., was proceeding in a motorcycle bearing No.KA-12Q-6905 towards Mangalore from Madikeri, when he reached near the place Ishwaramangala Cross, Kavu, Madnoor Village in Puttur Taluk, a Tavera car bearing No.KA-16-M-2258 came in a rash and negligent manner from opposite side and dashed against the motorcycle. Due to the accident, he fell down and sustained grievous. Immediately, he was shifted to Mahaveer Hospital, Puttur then to A.J.Hospital, Mangalore for higher treatment and on 03.05.2016, he succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. Therefore, the claimants being the parents, have filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, seeking compensation.

¶27

The Tribunal after considering the facts and circumstances and evidence on record, has granted a compensation of Rs.17,37,500/- with interest at the rate of 7% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation.

¶28

¶29

Being aggrieved by the lesser quantum of compensation, the present appeal is filed.

¶30

Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submitted that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meager one and prays for enhancement of compensation. Further, he submitted that PW.3 is the owner of the shop and stated that he was paying Rs.17,500/- p.m. and batta of Rs.200/- per day but the Tribunal has taken notional income only Rs.10,000/- p.m., which is on lesser side. Therefore, requested to hold monthly notional income of the deceased at Rs.17,500/- plus batta of Rs.200/- per day.

¶31

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and therefore, prays for dismissal of the appeal.

¶32

The Tribunal has granted the compensation under various heads as follows:

¶33

¶34

Sl.No.	Particulars	Amount (in.Rs.)
1.	Loss of dependency	16,20,000.00
2.	Medical bills	57,362.00
3.	Loss of love and affection	20,000.00
4.	Funeral expenses	25,000.00
5.	Loss of estate	15,000.00
	Total	17,37,362.00
	Rounded offto	17,37,500.00

¶35

In the present case, the deceased is only the son of the appellants/claimants. It is stated that the deceased was employed in Manandi Enterprises Jewels and Gems Consultants, Bangalore. The Tribunal by taking notional income at Rs.10,000/- p.m., adding 50% towards loss of future prospects in life and by applying relevant multiplier of '15', has awarded a compensation of Rs.16,20,000/- towards 'loss of dependency' including future prospects in life which is on the lesser side.

¶36

PW.3 has deposed that he was paying salary of Rs.17,500/- p.m. plus batta of Rs.200/- per day. Ex.P6 is the salary certificate, which is produced by PW.3-owner of the shop. The impediment for considering the said wage is that even though PW.3 has deposed

¶37

¶38

that he is maintaining books of accounts, registers and particulars of employees, who were working in the shop those are not produced before the Tribunal. Therefore, considering the factors that the shop is jewels shop situated in Bengaluru city, the salary taken by the Tribunal at Rs.10,000/- p.m. is on the lesser side. Considering the shop situated in Bengaluru city, the employee cannot work for just Rs.10,000/- p.m. and the salary may be as Rs.15,000/- p.m. Accordingly, the salary of the deceased is considered as Rs.15,000/- p.m. The deceased is aged 19 years old boy. Hence, 40% of his income is to be added toward 'loss of future prospects in life. The deceased is a bachelor, therefore, 50% is to be deducted towards his personal expenses. The appropriate multiplier applicable is '18'. Hence, the loss of dependency including loss of future prospects in life is re-assessed and quantified as under:

¶39

Rs.15,000 + 6,000 (40% of Rs.15,000) = Rs.21,000/Rs.21,000 x 50% x 18 x 12 = Rs.22,68,000/-

¶40

¶41

Accordingly, a sum of Rs.22,68,000/- is awarded under the head 'loss of dependency including loss of future prospects in life'.

¶42

Further, the Tribunal has granted only sum of Rs.20,000/- under the head 'loss of love and affection' to the claimants, which is found to be lesser and is exercised as per the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Ltd.,

¶43

vs. Nanu Ram & others reported in (2018)18 SCC 130, the claimants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each under the head 'loss of love and affection including loss of consortium' and as per the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rasmita Biswal vs. Div. Manager, National Insurance Co., Ltd., reported in AIR 2022 SC 85, for every three years 10% income is to be raised. Therefore, a sum of Rs.44,000/- each is awarded under the head 'loss of love and affection including loss of consortium'. Accordingly, a sum of Rs.88,000/- is awarded under the said head.

¶44

¶45

The compensation awarded under the other

¶46

heads are found to be correct and proper which needs no interference.

¶47

Thus, in all, the claimants are entitled for the

¶48

following sums:

¶49

Sl.No.	Particulars	Amount (in.Rs.)
1.	Loss ofdependency	22,68,000.00
2.	Medical bills	57,362.00
3.	Loss of love and affection	88,000.00
4.	Funeral expenses	25,000.00
5.	Loss of estate	15,000.00
	Total	24,53,362.00

¶50

The Tribunal has awarded the compensation

¶51

of Rs.17,37,500/-, but the appellants/claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.24,53,362/- . Therefore, the appellants/claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.7,15,862/-

¶52

(Rs.24,53,362 - Rs.17,37,500).

¶53

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶54

ORDER

¶55

i. The appeal is allowed-in-part .

¶56

¶57

ii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.1050/2016 is hereby modified holding the claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.7,15,862/- with interest @ 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.

¶58

iii. The claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 157 days in filing the appeal.

¶59

iv. Costs made easy.

¶60

v. Draw award accordingly.

¶61

Sd/JUDGE

¶62

Smt Rathi K G v. Sri Nithish

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Rathi K G v. Sri Nithish

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Premamma Vs H P Chandrappa

Smt K M Yashodamma Vs Sri Richard Wilson

Smt K M Yashodamma Vs Sri Richard Wilson

Sri. Muthuraj Vs Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.

Ningamma Vs M/S United Ins Co. Ltd.

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Bikya Nayak