Sri S v Basappa Vs Sri Siddaramu

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 31.07.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.5790/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-16), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶30

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

¶31

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:27242-DB MFA No. 8002 of 2019

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶35

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD)

¶36

This appeal is by the claimants in MVC

¶37

No.5790/2017 on the file of the X Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru [for short, 'the Tribunal ']. The Tribunal, by the impugned Judgment and Award dated 31.07.2019, has granted to the claimants¹ , who are the parents of the deceased Vijayakumar, a total compensation Rs.13,15,200/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.13,15,200/-under the following heads:

¶38

*Sl.No.*	*Head of Compensation*	*Amount [Rs]*
1	Loss of dependency	12,85,200-00
2	Loss of estate	15,000-00
3	Funeral and Transportation expenses	15,000-00
	*Total*	*13,15,200-00*

¶39

1 The appellant and the contesting respondent, for reasons of convenience, are referred to as ‘the Claimant’ and ‘the Insurer’.

¶40

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:27242-DB MFA No. 8002 of 2019

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

Sri Udaya Kumar, the learned counsel who

¶43

appears for the appellant, and Sri P.S.Jagadeesh, who appears for Sri P.B.Raju, the learned counsel on record for the Insurer [ the second respondent ], submit that there is no dispute that the claimants are the parents of the deceased who has died in a road accident on 23.08.2017 and that the Insurer is liable to pay the compensation to indemnify the owner of the vehicle. The learned counsels submit that the only question for consideration is:

¶44

Whether there must be enhancement in the compensation awarded towards loss of dependency with a further amount towards loss of consortium .

¶45

Sri Uday Kumar submits that the deceased [Sri Vijay Kumar] was a priest and running a juice centre and the fact that he was running this centre is probabilized by the evidence on record. In this regard, the learned counsel emphasizes that a lease deed is

¶46

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:27242-DB MFA No. 8002 of 2019

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

marked as an exhibit, and this shows that the deceased was paying monthly rent of Rs.3,500/- for his business premises of running juice centre, but the learned counsel cannot assert that there is proof of actual income.

¶49

When there is no proof of actual income,

¶50

this Court takes the notional income as per the schedule that is evolved for the purposes of settlement in Lok-Adalat, and according to this schedule, in the claim petitions arising out of the accidents in the year 2017, the notional income is taken at Rs.11,000/- per month. This Court finds that the loss of dependency must be computed taking such income [Rs.11,000/-] as the notional income of the deceased when it is not in dispute that he was working as a priest and running a tea stall. Further, there is no dispute that there must be addition towards the deceased’s prospects at 40% of the notional income and that deduction towards personal

¶51

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:27242-DB MFA No. 8002 of 2019

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

expenses of the deceased must be 50% because he has died a bachelor. The Tribunal has taken the multiplier of '17' and that is the multiplier that should be taken.

¶54

If the loss of dependency is re-computed taking these parameters, there would be an award of Rs.16,63,200/as against Rs.12,85,200/-. The computation of loss of dependency resulting in the enhancement is as aforesaid as per the following table.

¶55

Details for Computation of L	oss of	Depe	ndency
MonthlyIncome		Rs.	11,000/-
Addition towards Future Prospects	40%	Rs.	4,400/-
Monthly Income + Future
Prospects		Rs.	15,400/-
Annual Income		Rs.	1,84,800/-
Deduction Towards personal expenses	50%	Rs.	92,400/-
Multiplicand [After Deduction towards personal Expenses]		Rs.	92,400/-
Multiplier	18	.
Loss of Dependency		Rs.	16,63,200/-

¶56

The claimants are the parents, and they

¶57

have lost their son. They are entitled for loss of

¶58

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:27242-DB MFA No. 8002 of 2019

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

consortium. The accident is in the year 2017, and each of the parents must be granted consortium in a sum of Rs.50,000/-. There must be enhancement accordingly. In the light of the afore, the claimants are granted enhancement of compensation in a sum of Rs.4,78,000/- which is brought out by this comparative table.

¶61

	By the Tribunal	By this Court
Loss of dependency	Rs.12,85,200/-	Rs.16,63,200
Loss of Consortium	-	Rs.1,00,000/-
Loss of estate	Rs.15,000/-	Rs.15,000/-
Funeral and	Rs.15,000/-	Rs.15,000/-
transportation
expenses.
Total	Rs.13,15,200/-	Rs.17,93,200/-
*Enhanced compens*	*ation*	*Rs.4,78,000/-*

¶62

ORDER

¶63

The appeal is allowed-in-part granting to the claimants-appellants the enhanced compensation in a sum of Rs.4,78,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum calling upon the Insurer to

¶64