Smt Anniyamma Vs the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.03.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO. 3661/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE XIX ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU SCCH-17, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶28

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

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

¶30

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶31

The claimants, being the legal representatives of deceased, are in appeal seeking for enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

¶32

It is not in dispute that, as a result of the motor vehicle accident which occurred on 08.06.2018,

¶33

Sri L. Vishwanath, a 45 year old died.

¶34

It is not in dispute that the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation, as the offending vehicle was insured.

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

NC: 2026:KHC:36552 MFA No. 3881 of 2021

¶37

3 -

¶38

CNR: KAHC010260152021

¶39

The Tribunal, on assessment of the evidence adduced before it, has come to the conclusion that the driver of the offending vehicle was responsible for the accident which has resulted in the death of Sri L. Vishwanath. The Tribunal has thereafter proceeded to award the following sums as compensation:

¶40

Sl. No.	Particulars	Amount in(Rs.)
1.	Towards loss of dependency	21,00,000
2.	Towards loss of consortium	80,000
3.	Towards transportation of dead body, funeral & obsequies ceremonyexpenses	15,000
4.	Towards loss of estate	15,000
	Total	22,10,000

¶41

In order to arrive at the loss of dependency, the Tribunal has determined the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- without considering the evidence of PW.2 and salary certificate at Exs.P14 to P19. On perusal of evidence of PW.2 i.e., the employer of the deceased, he categorically stated that the deceased was an employee of M/s Uniq Detective and Security Services Pvt. Ltd., and he was earning a salary of Rs.20,305/- per month. Exs.P14 to P19 also reveal that the

¶42

4 -

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

NC: 2026:KHC:36552 MFA No. 3881 of 2021

¶45

CNR: KAHC010260152021

¶46

deceased was earning a salary of Rs.20,305/-. In such circumstance, the Tribunal ought to have considered the evidence of PW.2 and salary certificate-Exs.P14 to P19. Hence, the income of the deceased has to be considered at Rs.20,305/-. However, after deducting Rs.200/- towards professional tax, a rounded figure of Rs.20,000/- has to be considered as the income of deceased.

¶47

As the deceased was aged 45 years, a multiplier of

¶48

' 14' would have to be applied and as he was self-employed, 25% requires to be added to his monthly income towards future prospects and 2/3^rd has to be deducted towards personal expenses. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.28,00,000/- (20,000 + 25% X 12 X 14 X 2/3) towards “ loss of dependency” .

¶49

The claimants, being the wife and daughter of the deceased, they would each be entitled to a sum of Rs.48,400/- towards “loss of consortium” i.e., in all Rs.96,800/- ( 48,400 x 2) and they would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.36,300/- under the “conventional heads” .

¶50

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:36552 MFA No. 3881 of 2021

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

CNR: KAHC010260152021

¶53

Thus, the claimants, in modification of the

¶54

impugned award, would be entitled to the following sums:

¶55

Sl. No.	Particulars	Amount (In Rs.)
1.	Loss of Dependency	28,00,000
2.	Loss of Consortium	96,800
3.	Conventional Heads	36,300
	Total	29,33,100

¶56

Thus, the claimants would be entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.7,23,100/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the said amount.

¶57

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶58

The apportionment of compensation amount shall

¶59

be in terms of the award of the Tribunal.

¶60

The appeal is accordingly allowed in part .

¶61

SD/(RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE

¶62

HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40

Smt Anniyamma v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Anniyamma v. the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

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 Govindaraju Vs Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Smt Chikkathayamma Vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd

Rajanna H C Vs the Manager

Mr Jayaprakash Vs G Ayyapan

Sanjay a @ Sanjeev Vs Gowda L v

Sri. Madegowda Vs Mahesh