Smt. Sarojamma Vs the Managing Director

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.04.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.6857/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, MACT XXXII ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU (SCCH-3), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:28116-DB MFA No. 8861 of 2017

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶37

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

¶38

This appeal is by the claimants in MVC

¶39

No.6857/2016 on the file of VII Additional Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and XXXII ACMM Court of Small Causes, [SCCH-3] [for short ' the Tribunal' ]. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgment and award dated 05.04.2017, has partly allowed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 granting to the claimants compensation in a sum of Rs.16,87,000/- with interest at 8% per annum from the date of claim

¶40

petition till the date of deposit.

¶41

Sl. No.	Description	Amount
1.	Towards loss of dependency	Rs.15,12,000.00
2.	Towards loss of love and _affection _	Rs.1,40,000.00
3.	Towards loss of consortium	Rs.20,000.00
4.	Towards loss of estate	Rs.10,000.00
5.	Towards Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses	Rs.20,000.00
	*Total*	*Rs.17,02,000.00*

¶42

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:28116-DB MFA No. 8861 of 2017

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

The claimants are the widow, children and

¶45

parents of the deceased – Sri Gangaraju who has died because of injuries suffered in a road accident on 26.10.2016 involving the respondent - Transport Corporation's Bus. The Transport Corporation’s liability to pay just compensation is not disputed.

¶46

Sri. K P Bhuvan, the learned counsel for

¶47

the claimants, submits that this Court must grant an enhancement in compensation towards loss of dependency and loss of consortium. The learned counsel, to support this canvass, submits that Sri Gangaraju has died because of the injuries suffered when he was working as a fisherman who participated in the Government tenders for fishing contract, and therefore, the Tribunal could not have taken the income of the deceased at Rs.7,000/- per month. However, the learned counsel cannot dispute that except with the license issued by the fishery

¶48

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:28116-DB MFA No. 8861 of 2017

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

department, no other document is produced to prove

¶51

Gangaraju’s actual income, and in fact, he is categorical that the claimants cannot place on record the details of the contract issued to the deceased.

¶52

This Court, in the circumstances is not persuaded that there must be re-computation of the compensation based on an income which is higher than the notional income, and the appropriate notional income, in terms of the schedule evolved for settlement in Lok-Adalat, will be in a sum of Rs.9,500/- as against Rs.7,000/-. Sri. F.S. Dabali,

¶53

the learned counsel for the Transport Corporation, while not being able to dispute this ground for enhancement, contends that the Tribunal has granted additional compensation towards future prospects at 50% when it is settled that it can only be paid at 40%. The learned counsel is justified, and the loss of dependency must be computed subject to the changes as aforesaid. The computations is:

¶54

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:28116-DB MFA No. 8861 of 2017

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

Details for Computation o	f Loss o	f Dependency
MonthlyIncome		Rs. 9,500/-
Addition towards Future Prospects	40%	Rs. 3,800/-
Monthly Income + Future Prospects		Rs. 13,300/-
Annual Income		Rs. 1,59,600/-
Deduction Towards personal expenses	1/5	Rs. 31,920/-
Multiplicand [After Deduction towards personal Expenses]		Rs. 1,27,680/-
Multipler	15
*Loss of Dependency*		*Rs.19,15,200/-*

¶57

The next question for consideration is whether there must be any increase in loss of consortium . On this, Sri. K. P. Bhuvan submits that the deceased is survived by a widow, who is only 35

¶58

years, 4 children who were all minors and the parents aged above 50 years, that they were all dependent on the income of Sri Gangaraju, that they have lost love and affection, and as such, there must be just enhancement.

¶59

Sri. F.S. Dabali, submits that any enhancement on this ground must be considered in

¶60

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:28116-DB MFA No. 8861 of 2017

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

light of the fact that the Tribunal, apart from the sum of Rs.1,40,000/- towards loss of love and affection, has also granted a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of consortium. The learned counsel emphasizes that each of the claimant will be entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- on his/her own account and on other head they will collectively be entitled to another sum of Rs.30,000/- towards funeral and other expenses. The enhancement of the compensation therefore will be Rs.30,000/- as against Rs.20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The total enhancement after deduction of Rs.15,000/- which is paid by the Transport Corporation, will be in a sum of Rs.5,08,200/- which is brought out by the following comparative table.

¶63

Description	By the Tribunal [in Rs.]	By this Court [in Rs.]
Towards Loss of Dependency	Rs. 15,12,000/-	*Rs.19,15,200/-*
Loss of	Rs. 20,000/-
consortium		*Rs. 2,80,000/-*
Towards Loss of	Rs. 1,40,000/-	[Rs.40,000/- x 7]
Love and Affection

¶64

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:28116-DB MFA No. 8861 of 2017

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

Loss of estate	Rs. 10,000/-
Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses	Rs. 20,000/-	*Rs. 30,000/-*
*Total*	_Rs. 17,02,000/- _	*Rs.22,25,200/-*
Enhancement		*Rs. 5,23,200/-*
Deduction of Rs.15,000/- [as it is already paid by the Transport _Corporation _		*Rs. 5,08,200/-*

¶67

In the result, the following:

¶68

ORDER

¶69

[A] The appeal is allowed-in-part. The Tribunal’s impugned judgment and award dated 05.04.2017 in MVC No. No.6857/2016 is modified granting enhanced compensation in a sum of Rs.5,08,200/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition to the date of deposit but for the period between 05.06.2018 and

¶70

9 - NC: 2025:KHC:28116-DB MFA No. 8861 of 2017

¶71

HC-KAR

¶72

25.02.2022 as the appeal stood

¶73

dismissed for default during this period.

¶74

[B] The Respondent–Insurer is called upon to compute the interest and deposit the amount with the Tribunal within eight [8] weeks from the date of receipt of a certificate copy of this order.

¶75

[C] The Tribunal is directed to disburse the compensation to the claimants in terms of its decision on apportionment.

¶76

[D] The Registry is also directed to transmit

¶77

the records.

¶78

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶79

Sd/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶80

RKA; List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1

Smt. Sarojamma v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sarojamma v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Krishna Murthy Vs Sri. Adarsh @ Adarsh B. Hampole

Sri. Raghavendra. N Vs Smt. Anuradha. C. v.

The Divisional Controller Vs Hanumanthegowda

Smt Esther Leena Vs Icici Lombard Gen.Ins.Co.Ltd

Sri Siddeshwara Poultry Vs Smt Priya Selvi

Smt S. Bindhu Kumari Vs Dhimantha Bharadwaj C R