Partly allowed

Smt. Kavitha Basavaraj Uppar v. Aishwarya Chakraborty

Karnataka HC20 Sept 2024MFA/77/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court enhanced compensation in motor accident case. Appellants challenged the Tribunal's lower assumed income. Court adopted Karnataka State Legal Services Authority chart rate and calculated enhanced damages for dependency, funeral, estate, and consortium.

What did the court decide?

Compensation awarded by the Tribunal enhanced from Rs.24,34,800 to Rs.27,19,400 along with interest at 6% p.a.

Smt. Kavitha Basavaraj Uppar Vs Aishwarya Chakraborty — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:38872 MFA No. 77 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 77 OF 2024 (MV-D)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. KAVITHA BASAVARAJ UPPAR, W/O LATE BASAVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,

¶8

GANESH BASAVARAJ UPPAR, S/O LATE BASAVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS,

¶9

PRIYANKA BASAVARAJ UPPAR, D/O LATE BASAVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS,

¶10

THE APPELLANTS NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS REP BY APPELLANT NO.1/ NEXT FRIEND

¶11

Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

ALL ARE R/AT NO.915 F, HAUNSABHAVI VILLAGE, HIREKEREU TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT-581 109. NOW R/AT BANGALORE.

¶13

…APPELLANTS

¶14

(BY SRI. KAILAS SHANKAR P. S., ADVOCATE (VC))

¶15

AND:

¶16

AISHWARYA CHAKRABORTY, S/O CHAKRAVARTHY, MAJOR, R/O 10^TH CROSS, 1^ST MAIN BLOCK BELAVADI V AT POST,

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:38872 MFA No. 77 of 2024

¶18

YELAWALA HOBLI, MYSORE CITY.

¶19

THE MANAGER,

¶20

THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.5^TH AND 6^TH FLOOR, KRISHI BHAVAN, 5^TH FLOOR, NEAR HUDSON CIRCLE, NRUPATHUGNA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001.

¶21

…RESPONDENTS

¶22

(BY SMT. MANJULA N. TEJASWI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (VC); V/O. DATED 07.03.2024 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶23

THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.08.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO. 2620/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, PRINCIPAL M.A.C.T., BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶24

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DICTATING JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶26

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶27

Aggrieved by the quantum of amount that is awarded

¶28

as compensation by the Principal Motor Accidents Claims

¶29

Tribunal, Bengaluru through orders in MVC No.2620/2021

¶30

dated 09.08.2023, the claimants are before this Court by way of an appeal.

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:38872 MFA No. 77 of 2024

¶33

Heard Sri.Kailas Shankar.P.S, learned counsel

¶34

for the appellants and also Smt.Manjula.N.Tejaswi, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

¶35

The only point involved in this appeal as submitted by Sri.Kailas Shankar.P.S is in respect of the earnings of the deceased Basavaraju Parasappa Uppar (herein after referred to as the 'deceased' for brevity) as on the date of accident. Learned counsel contended that the deceased as a painter was earning Rs.25,000/- p.m. However, the Tribunal without any basis, took the notional income as Rs.12,750/- p.m. which is erroneous. Learned counsel thereby seeks the Court to award justifiable sum as compensation under the head loss of dependency.

¶36

Per contra the submission that is made by Smt.Manjula.N.Tejaswi is that the Tribunal took the minimum wages of a painter as notified by the State of Karnataka through a gazette notification and adopted the said figure which is highly justifiable. Learned counsel thereby sought to dismiss of the appeal.

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:38872 MFA No. 77 of 2024

¶39

In reply of the submission thus made, learned counsel for the appellant Sri.Kailas Shankar.P.S submitted that the accident occurred in the year 2020 and for the relevant period, the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as Rs.14,500/p.m. and at least the said figure should have been adopted by the Tribunal. Also stating that where income in certain terms is not established, the chart adopted by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is being considered, learned counsel relied upon the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case between Wasim vs. Liyakatali Tayabji Soudagar and another in MFA No.103627/2016.

¶40

It is not in dispute that the deceased was a painter by profession. The Tribunal at paragraph 27 of the impugned order made a clear mention that in the complaint Pw.2 stated that the deceased and himself were working together as painters. The Tribunal is justified in coming to a conclusion that the appellants established the

¶41

¶42

NC: 2024:KHC:38872 MFA No. 77 of 2024

¶43

occupation of the deceased as painter by the date of accident. This Court does not find any grounds to discard the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants Sri.Kailas Shankar.P.S to take the notional income of the deceased as Rs.14,500/- p.m. which figure is adopted by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority for settling the claims for the relevant period. Even in case, the notional income is taken as Rs.14,500/- p.m., the same would be less than a sum of Rs.500/- per day. Therefore, this Court considers desirable to take the notional income of the deceased as Rs.14,500/- p.m.

¶44

It is not in dispute that the deceased died at the age of 34 years. Therefore, 40% of the actual earnings are required to be added towards future prospects as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 . The claimants are the wife and the minor children i.e., appellant Nos.1 to 3 herein. As the dependents thus are three in number, 1/3^rd of the

¶45

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:38872 MFA No. 77 of 2024

¶46

actual earnings are required to be deducted towards the personal and living expenses which the deceased would have incurred for himself had he been alive. The appropriate multiplier to be applied is ‘16’ as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation

¶47

and Another reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 . Thus the compensation which the appellants are entitled to under the head loss of dependency is as under:

¶48

Notional monthly income	Rs.14,500/-
Annual income	Rs.1,74,000/-
Add 40% towards future prospects	Rs.2,43,600/-
Deduct 1/3^rdtowards personal and living expenses	Rs.1,62,400/-
Loss of dependency, on applying appropriate multiplier 16	Rs.25,98,400/-

¶49

The compensation which the appellants thus

¶50

entitled to under the head loss of dependency is Rs.25,98,400/-. As the accident occurred in the year 2020,

¶51

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:38872 MFA No. 77 of 2024

¶52

together with the said amount, the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.16,500/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.16,500/- towards loss of estate. Also the first appellant being the wife of the deceased is entitled to Rs.44,000/towards loss of spousal consortium and appellant Nos.2 and 3 being the children of the deceased are entitled to

¶53

Rs.44,000/- towards loss of parental consortium.

¶54

Thus, the compensation which the appellants

¶55

are entitled to will be as under:

¶56

Sl. Description Amount
No
1 Loss of dependency Rs.25,98,400
2 Funeral expenses Rs.16,500
3 Loss of estate Rs.16,500
4 Loss of spousal
Rs.44,000
consortium
5 Loss of parental
Rs.44,000
consortium
Total Rs.27,19,400

¶57

The Tribunal through the impugned order

¶58

awarded a sum of Rs.24,34,800/- as compensation.

¶59

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:38872 MFA No. 77 of 2024

¶60

However, the justifiable sum which the appellants are entitled to is Rs.27,19,400/-.

¶61

Thus the appeal is disposed of with the following:

¶62

ORDER

¶63

(i) The appeal is allowed in part.

¶64

(ii) The compensation that is granted by the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru through orders in MVC No.2620/2021 dated 09.08.2023 is enhanced from Rs.24,34,800/to Rs.27,19,400/-.

¶65

(iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit.

¶66

(iv) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of 8(eight) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶67

¶68

NC: 2024:KHC:38872 MFA No. 77 of 2024

¶69

(v) On such deposit, the first appellant is permitted to withdraw her share along with accrued interest.

¶70

(vi) The amount that falls to the share of appellant Nos.2 and 3 shall be invested in any interest yielding fixed deposit scheme of any nationalized bank till they attain the age of majority.

¶71

(vii) On they attaining the age of majority, they are permitted to withdraw their respective shares.

¶72

(viii) The apportionment made applies to the enhanced sum as well.

¶73

Sd/(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE

¶74

NS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Smt. Kavitha Basavaraj Uppar v. Aishwarya Chakraborty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kavitha Basavaraj Uppar v. Aishwarya Chakraborty

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

Sri Ashfaq Ahmed Vs M/S National Insurance Co. Ltd.

Smt Rangamma Vs Smt Kariyamma

Smt. Lalithamma Vs Sri. Santhosh Kumar K G

Smt. Rajamma Vs the Manager

Smt Prameela Vs Mr Mohammed Soukath

Afzal Ahmad Vs Future General India Insurance Co. Ltd.