Smt Ramya Vs Sri Raghu

M/S. CONTEC SYNDICATE PVT. LTD. M.G.F.V. VISHNU PRIYA, 60328 FLAT NO.102, SUNNAPUBBATTILU CENTRE MOGALRAJAPURAM, VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA ANDHRA PRADESH -520 010.

¶29

THE BRANCH MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. 10156, VENKATESHWARA TOWERS 1ST FLOOR, ELURU ROAD, GUDIVADA ANDHRA PRADESH -534 001.

¶30

THE MANAGER ICICI LOMBARD MOTOR INSURANCE SECOND SVR COMPLEX, HOSUR ROAD BENGALURU-560 030.

¶31

…RESPONDENTS

¶32

(BY SRI S.V. HEGDE MULKHAND, ADVOCATE, FOR R-3 AND

¶33

VIDE ORDER DATED 18-7-2024, NOTICE TO R-1,

¶34

R-2 AND R-4 ARE DISPENSED WITH)

¶35

¶36

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V. ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 4-1-2023 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.74 OF 2022 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, CHIKKAMAGALURU, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶37

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶38

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶39

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:31006-DB MFA No. 3190 of 2024

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶42

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)

¶43

This appeal is filed by the claimants aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 4-1-2023 passed in M.V.C. No.74 of 2022 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate and Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chikkamagaluru, whereby, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.18,91,400/- as compensation with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

¶44

For the sake of convenience, the parties herein shall

¶45

be referred to in terms of their status before the Tribunal.

¶46

Brief facts of the case are that on 25-10-2021 at about 9.15 P.M., Sri K.K. Ramesh (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') was proceeding in his motorcycle, bearing Registration No.KA-18 EH-4140, in front of Bee Hive Home Stay, Chikkamagaluru – Belur Road, respondent No.1, being the driver of lorry, bearing Registration No.AP-37 TC-8559, drove it in a rash and negligent manner with excessive speed and dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased. Due to

¶47

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:31006-DB MFA No. 3190 of 2024

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

this, the deceased sustained grievous injuries. Immediately he was shifted to M.G. Hospital and later to Janapriya Hospital, Hassan, where the Doctor declared 'he was dead'. Due to his death, wife, daughter and mother have lost their dependency and hence, claimed compensation on various heads.

¶50

Heard Sri Kumara B., learned counsel for the appellants-claimants, Sri S.V. Hegde Mulkhand, learned counsel for respondent No.3-Insurance Company and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.

¶51

Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants has contended that income of the deceased was more than Rs.24,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has considered at Rs.9,000/- per month, which is on lower side. Hence, he prays to enhance the compensation.

¶52

Per contra , the learned counsel for respondent No.3Insurance Company, supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded

¶53

5 -

¶54

NC: 2025:KHC:31006-DB MFA No. 3190 of 2024

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

just and reasonable compensation under each heads, which

¶57

does not call for interference at the hands of this Court. Thus, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.

¶58

As there is no dispute regarding the death of the deceased in a road traffic accident occurred 25-10-2021 due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry, bearing Registration No.AP-37 TC-8559, by its driver and liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the only point that arises for our consideration in this appeal is:

¶59

“Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?”

¶60

After hearing both the learned counsel and perusal of the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal, we are of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable and it is on lower side. The Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- per month without any proof. In the absence of salary certificate/pay slip, the Court shall consider the notional

¶61

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:31006-DB MFA No. 3190 of 2024

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

income that would be available in the year 2021, which is assessed as Rs.15,000/- per month. As per the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 , 40% of the income has to be added towards future prospects, which comes to Rs.6,000/(15,000 X 40%). Thus, the total salary would be Rs.21,000/per month (15,000 + 6,000), annually it will be Rs.2,52,000/- (21,000 X 12). There are three dependents, as such 1/3^rd of income of the deceased has to be deducted towards his personal expenses, i.e. Rs.2,52,000 X 1/3 = Rs.84,000/-. After deduction, the amount to be contributed to his family would be Rs.1,68,000/- (2,52,000/- minus 84,000/-). Considering the age of the deceased, ‘18’ multiplier would be applicable. Thus, the compensation payable under the head of ‘loss of dependency’ would be Rs.30,24,000/- (1,68,000 X 18).

¶64

7 -

¶65

NC: 2025:KHC:31006-DB MFA No. 3190 of 2024

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

In the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.

¶68

v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and Others reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130 , the Hon’ble Apex Court by referring to the decision of the Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi's case, stated supra, has discussed about granting the compensation under the head of ‘loss of consortium’ and has also issued guidelines for grant of ‘spousal consortium’, ‘parental consortium’ and ‘filial consortium’. The claimants are the wife, daughter and mother of the deceased. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesaid decision, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.40,000/- each) towards ‘loss of consortium’ as against Rs.44,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶69

Further, Rs.16,500/- towards 'loss of estate' and Rs.16,500/- towards 'funeral expenses' awarded by the Tribunal are maintained.

¶70

Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following compensation:

¶71

8 -

¶72

NC: 2025:KHC:31006-DB MFA No. 3190 of 2024

¶73

HC-KAR

¶74

HEADS	Rs.
Loss of dependency	30,24,000.00
Loss of estate	16,500.00
Loss of consortium (Rs.40,000 X 3 dependents)	1,20,000.00
Funeral expenses	16,500.00
TOTAL	31,77,000.00
Less: Compensation awarded by the Tribunal	18,91,400.00
ENHANCED COMPENSATION	12,85,600.00

¶75

In the result, we pass the following

¶76

O R D E R

¶77

i. The appeal is allowed-in-part .

¶78

ii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated hereinabove. The claimants are entitled for a total compensation of *Rs.31,77,000/- as against Rs.18,91,400/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the additional compensation of Rs.12,85,600/- from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of realisation, excluding interest for delayed period of 374 days in filing the appeal.

¶79