Smt.Pushpa S Vs Sri.Narayanaswamy v

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 24.08.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.4721/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT-3, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA

¶27

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶28

This appeal has been filed by the claimants’ being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 24.08.2021

¶29

3 -

¶30

NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

passed by the VII Additional Small Cause Judge and ACMM, Member MACT-3, Bengaluru (for short 'the tribunal') in MVC No.4721/2019, seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶33

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

¶34

The brief facts of the case are that one Hemannthraju V. the father of claimant Nos.2 and 3, husband of claimant No.1 and son of claimant No.4, met with an accident on 22.06.2019, at around 05.30 p.m., at Juttanahalli on Magadi-Huliyurdurga road and as a result, he sustained grievous injuries and while undergoing treatment, he succumbed to the injuries. With these reasons, they prayed to award compensation of Rs.60,00,000/-.

¶35

Respondent No.1 is the owner and respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending vehicle. Both the respondents have appeared and filed their respective written statements denying averments in the claim petition. Respondent No.2 denied its liability to pay the compensation and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

¶36

4 -

¶37

NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

From the rival contentions of the parties, the

¶40

Tribunal framed necessary issues, for its determination.

¶41

The claimants to prove their case examined one witness as PW-1 and marked 21 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-21. Respondents have not led any evidence.

¶42

The Tribunal, after hearing both the parties and

¶43

appreciating the materials available on record, awarded the following amount of compensation:

¶44

Particulars		Amount in Rs.
Loss of dependency		32,13,000/-
Loss of estate		15,000/-
Towards spousal consortium petitioner No.1)	(for	40,000/-
Towards parental consortium petitioner Nos.2 and 3)	(for	80,000/-
Towards filial consortium petitioner No.4)	(for	40,000/-
Transportation of dead body funeral expenses	and	15,000/-
Total		34,03,000/-

¶45

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

8. Being aggrieved by the said award passed by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶48

9. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contends that the deceased was a driver-cum-owner of a taxi. He was driving an Uber taxi and earning nearly Rs.1,000 per day. As owner cum driver, he had two sources of income one as a driver and the other as the owner of the taxi. To substantiate the same, the claimants have produced the bank account extract and RC of the vehicle; which was a commercial vehicle. They have also produced the driving licence of the deceased. The Tribunal has not considered these materials and has taken the income as Rs.15,000/- per month. Therefore, it is prayed to take income as prayed for in the claim petition.

¶49

Learned counsel for respondent No.2-insurer contended that the Tribunal has considered the facts in detail and has rightly held that income of the deceased was Rs.15,000/- per month. This does not call for any interference by this Court.

¶50

6 -

¶51

NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

The Tribunal has taken notional income of the deceased as Rs.15,000/-per month, added 40% of the income towards future prospects and applied the multiplier as '17'. The claimants have produced the bank account extract of the deceased. It shows that he was receiving the amount from Uber India System. Ex.P.10 is a copy of the driving licence and he had licence to drive three-wheeler non-transport vehicle and light motor commercial vehicle. A copy of the B-register extract is at Ex.P.20. It pertains to the car standing in the name of deceased. The claimants have also produced a certificate issued by the SBI stating that, after the death of Hemanthraju, his legal heirs sold the car and repaid the outstanding loan amount. The said certificate is marked as Ex.P.21. These documents corroborate the evidence of PW.1. Therefore, the Tribunal’s observation that the claimants failed to produce material evidence to prove that the deceased was earning income from operating the taxi is not sustainable. Looking at the above documents as well as Ex.P.19, the income of the deceased can be taken as Rs.18,000/- per month, 40% of the same needs to be added towards future prospects. The applicable multiplier is '17'. The Tribunal rightly deducted 1/4^th

¶54

7 -

¶55

NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

towards personal expenses. Accordingly, the claimants were

¶58

entitled to compensation under the head 'Loss of dependency' at Rs.38,55,600/ (18000+40%x12x17x3/4), as against Rs.32,13,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The claimants are entitled to the following amount of compensation:

¶59

Particulars A	mount in Rs.
Loss of dependency (18,000+40%x12x17x3/4)	38,55,600/-
Loss of estate	15,000/-
Towards spousal consortium	40,000/-
Towards parental consortium	80,000/-
Towards filial consortium	40,000/-
Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses	15,000/-
Total	40,45,600/-
Amount awarded by the Tribunal	34,03,000/-
Enhancement-	6,42,600/-
Rounded off-	*6,43,000/-*

¶60

The claimants are entitled to enhancement of

¶61

Rs.6,42,600/-, which is rounded off to Rs.6,43,000/-. The claimants are also entitled to interest on the enhanced amount

¶62

8 -

¶63

NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

of compensation at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.

¶66

Undisputedly, respondents are liable to pay the said

¶67

amount.

¶68

In the result, I proceed to pass the following:

¶69

ORDER

¶70

i) The Appeal is allowed in part .

¶71

ii) The judgment and award dated 24^th August 2021, passed in MVC.No.4721/2019, by the VII Additional Small Cause Judge and ACMM, Member MACT-3, Bengaluru, stands modified.

¶72

iii) The claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.6,43,000/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount, from the date of petition till its realization.

¶73

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

¶74

v) The rest of the order of the Tribunal with respect to apportionment, deposits and release shall remain unaltered.

¶75

vi) Draw award accordingly.

¶76