Claimant family sought enhancement of motor accident compensation fixed by the Tribunal at Rs.29,40,750/- for the death of a 27-year-old employee. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's income assessment of Rs.19,333/- p.m. based on salary certificate and conventional-head awards, and dismissed the appeal.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:41600-DB MFA No.3369/2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024 PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3369/2024 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
ALL ARE R/O. H.NO.1-48-1 AMMA SANNIDHI NEAR SHREE DURGA PARAMESHWARI TEMPLE AGRAHARA, PADU YENAGUDDE KATAPADI, UDUPI - 574 105.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. SWATI G. HEGDE, ADV., FOR SRI. H. PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY, ADV.,)
AND:
NC: 2024:KHC:41600-DB MFA No.3369/2024
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI, ADV., FOR R2 V/O/DTD:29.07.2024 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.01.2024 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. MACT AT UDUPI, IN M.V.C. No.1074/2019 TO THE EXTENT OF DISALLOWED CLAIM AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL JUDGMENT
( PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL )
Challenging the judgment and award dated 29.01.2024
passed in MVC No.1074/2019 on the file of the Addl. MACT and Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Udupi, the appellants have preferred this appeal.
Nos.1 and 2 in this appeal were respondent Nos.1 and 2 before
the Tribunal. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to henceforth according to their ranks before the Tribunal.
Tribunal. Respondent No.2 - insurer of the offending vehicle
filed objections denying the factum of accident, age, income and avocation of deceased. It was contended that the accident was caused due to the negligent riding of the motor cycle by the deceased. It was further contended that as on the date of accident, deceased was not holding valid driving license and there is no nexus between the accident and death of deceased. Hence, they sought for dismissal of the petition.
got examined herself as PW-1 and two other witnesses as PW-2 and PW-3 and got marked Exs.P1 to P28. Respondents did not adduce any evidence. The Tribunal, on appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, partly allowed the claim petition awarding compensation of Rs.29,40,750/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till deposit. Being aggrieved, the petitioners are in appeal seeking for higher compensation.
the appellants submits that the Tribunal committed grave error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.19,333/- p.m. which is contrary to Exs.P21 to P23, offer of employment, letter of appointment and salary certificate which indicate that the
deceased was drawing more than Rs.21,000/- p.m. Hence, he seeks to re-assess the income of deceased as per the salary certificate. He further submits that the petitioners have spent substantial amount towards transportation of dead body, funeral expenses and also incurred miscellaneous expenses which has not been properly awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, he seeks to enhance the compensation appropriately under the aforesaid heads.
NC: 2024:KHC:41600-DB MFA No.3369/2024
records, the point that arises for consideration is “ Whether the appellants are entitled for higher compensation?"
ANALYSIS
in the road accident that occurred on 23.06.2019, one Sri.Shravan S.Poojary aged about 27 years, succumbed to the injuries. It is also not in dispute that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of Toofan vehicle bearing registration No.KA-48 M-2851 driven by its driver and the said vehicle was insured with respondent No.2 - Insurance Company.
NC: 2024:KHC:41600-DB MFA No.3369/2024
indicates that his approximate take home salary was Rs.19,333/- p.m.. On close perusal of the appointment letter and salary certificate on record, there are various allowances and components. If those components are added after deducting the permissible deductions, take home salary of the deceased is Rs.19,333/- p.m. The Tribunal, considering the oral testimony of PW-2 and salary certificate at Ex.P23, rightly assessed the income of deceased which does not call for any interference.
1 (2017) 16 SCC 680
2 (2018) 18 SCC 130
NC: 2024:KHC:41600-DB MFA No.3369/2024
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed.
Sd/(K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE
Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE
RV
List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellants were entitled to higher compensation than awarded by the Tribunal for the death of the deceased in the road accident?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & OthersRelied on¶11
(2017) 16 SCC 680 · Who else cites this
Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram & OthersRelied on¶11
(2018) 18 SCC 130 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Aruna S.
K. Srinivasa Poojary
Shravanya S. Poojary
Laxman D. Talageri
Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
K.S. Mudagal
Vijaykumar A. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
