Selika Vs Mohammed Noorudheen Ahammed

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 09.12.2020, PASSED IN MVC NO.1795/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE I-ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AND MACT, MANGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:46617 MFA No. 2779 of 2021

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

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

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA

¶30

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶31

This appeal is filed by the claimants against the judgment and award dated 09.12.2020 passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and CJM and MACT, Mangaluru, (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.1795/2018.

¶32

Though this appeal is listed for admission, with

¶33

consent of learned advocates appearing for both the sides, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

¶34

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.

¶35

The brief facts of the case of both the parties before the Tribunal were that :

¶36

On 24.08.2018, at about 7.30 p.m., the deceased Mr. Rameez Raz while riding the motor cycle bearing Registration No.KL-14-N-2246 from Kumbla towards Uppala, met with an accident due to involvement of motor cycle bearing registration

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC:46617 MFA No. 2779 of 2021

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

No.KL-60-K-2806 at Mangalpady village, Kasargodu District. Due to the impact, he sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries.

¶41

It is the further case of the claimants that the deceased was aged 25 years and earning Rs.1,000/- per day by working as a driver of the Goods Tempo. He was contributing his earnings towards the family. Claimant No1 is the wife, claimant No.2 is the father, claimant No.3 is the mother, claimant Nos.4 and 5 are the sisters and claimant No.6 is the brother of the deceased. With these reasons, they prayed to award compensation of Rs.35,00,000/-.

¶42

Respondent No.1 was the owner and respondent

¶43

No.2 was the insurer of the offending motorcycle in which the deceased was travelling.

¶44

The respondents filed their written statement,

¶45

denying the contentions of the claim petitioners. Respondent No.2 denied its liability to pay the compensation on the ground that accident occurred due to the negligence of driver of the

¶46

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:46617 MFA No. 2779 of 2021

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

motor cycle. With these reasons, prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

¶49

From the rival contentions of the parties, the

¶50

Tribunal framed necessary issues.

¶51

The claimants to prove their case examined two witnesses as PW-1 and PW-2 and marked 17 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-17 Respondents did not examine any witness but marked Ex.R-1 - Insurance policy.

¶52

The Tribunal after hearing both parties and appreciating the evidence on record, awarded following compensation:

¶53

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Loss of dependency	24,19,200
Loss of consortium	40,000
Funeral expenses	15,000
Loss of estate	15,000
Total	24,89,200

¶54

11. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel

¶55

appearing for the claimants as well as learned counsel for respondents.

¶56

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:46617 MFA No. 2779 of 2021

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

12. The Tribunal after assessing the materials available on record, held that accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of motor cycle by its driver causing death of Rameez Raz. The said finding is not challenged by respondents. Hence, there is no need to reconsider the same.

¶59

13. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the Tribunal has not assessed the income of the deceased properly. The amount of compensation awarded under the head of 'loss of consortium' is also on the lower side. Therefore, prayed to enhance the compensation.

¶60

14. The claimants were unable to prove the earnings of the deceased as Rs.30,000/- per month. Therefore, the Tribunal has assessed the notional income of the deceased as Rs.12,000/- per month. In comparison with the notional income prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the amount awarded by Tribunal is less. Hence, following the said chart, the notional income is taken as Rs.12,500/- per month.

¶61

15. Remaining factors to calculate compensation under the head loss of dependency are not in dispute.

¶62

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:46617 MFA No. 2779 of 2021

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

16. It is the further submission of the learned counsel

¶65

for the appellant that, as per the law laid down in Pranay Sethi's case (supra) and in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd., -vs- Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram,¹ the amount of compensation awarded under the conventional heads are also on the lower side. Therefore, prayed to enhance the same.

¶66

17. As per the law laid down in Pranay Sathi's case (supra) and Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd., case (supra), each claimant are entitled to compensation under the head 'loss of consortium'.

¶67

18. Accordingly, the following compensation is awarded:

¶68

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Loss of dependency	25,20,000
(Rs.12,500+40% x 18 X 12 x 2/3)
Loss of consortium(40,000x6)	2,40,000
Funeral expenses	15,000
Loss of estate	15,000
Total	27,90,000
Amount awarded by the Tribunal Enhancement-	24,89,200 3,00,800
Rounded off-	3,01,000

¶69

1 (2018) SC 1247

¶70

8 -

¶71

NC: 2025:KHC:46617 MFA No. 2779 of 2021

¶72

HC-KAR

¶73

Thus, the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.3,01,000./- with interest at 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount from the date of petition till its realization.

¶74

It is not in dispute that respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.

¶75

21. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶76

ORDER

¶77

i) The Appeal is allowed in part .

¶78

ii) The judgment and award dated 09.12.2020 , passed by the I Addl.Senior Civil Judge and CJM and MACT, Mangaluru in MVC.No.1795/2018 stands modified;

¶79

iii) The claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.3,01,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount, from the date of petition till its realization.

¶80

iv) The respondent No.2 shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award.

¶81