Smt Shama Vs Sri Srinivasa

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.05.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.4609/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU SCCH-1, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION BARRED BY TIME.

¶32

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶33

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶34

This appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 04.05.2022 passed in MVC No.6409/2019 by the I Additional SCJ and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and I Additional Small Causes Judge and

¶35

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:14923 MFA No. 6294 of 2024

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

ACMM, Bengaluru (for short, 'the Tribunal') seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶38

Babu, S/o late Sardar, met with an accident on

¶39

06.09.2019 and subsequently died. His wife and children filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after considering the entire evidence on record, awarded a compensation of Rs.17,14,600/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

¶40

Aggrieved by the said award, the claimants preferred an appeal contending that the Tribunal erred in taking the age of the deceased as 51 years. In Ex.P-9, the ration card, his age is shown as 43 years and the same was issued in the year 2015. Babu died in the accident in the year 2019. Therefore, as on the date of death, his age would be 47 years. Hence, the Tribunal ought to have applied multiplier of '13' instead of '11' and added 25% towards future prospects instead of 10%. Accordingly, they sought for enhancement of compensation.

¶41

4 -

¶42

NC: 2026:KHC:14923 MFA No. 6294 of 2024

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

Heard the arguments of both sides.

¶45

On perusal of Ex.P-9, the IMV report and the

¶46

post-mortem report, it is seen that in Ex.P9, the age of the deceased is mentioned as 43 years, and the same was issued on 13.08.2015. In the FIR, his age is shown as 60

¶47

years, whereas in the inquest and

¶48

post-mortem report, his age is mentioned as 47 years. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to take the age of the deceased as 47 years for the purpose of calculation and accordingly, the multiplier is taken as '13'. The deceased has not produced any proof of income. As the accident occurred in the year 2019, the notional income of Rs.14,000/- per month taken by the Tribunal is just and proper. The deceased, being aged 47 years, is entitled for an addition of 25% of future prospects. Further, onefourth of the income shall be deducted towards personal expenses. The loss of dependency comes to Rs.14,000/- + 25% = Rs.17,500/per month;

¶49

Rs.17,500 × 12 × 13 ×1/4 = Rs.20,47,500/-.

¶50

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:14923 MFA No. 6294 of 2024

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

The claimant/appellant No.1 is entitled to Rs.40,000/towards spousal consortium. The claimants/appellant Nos.2, 3 and 4 are entitled for Rs.40,000/- parental consortium by each of them. The appellants are also entitled to Rs.30,000/under conventional heads .

¶53

Accordingly, the compensation payable is

¶54

recalculated as follows:

¶55

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Loss of dependency	20,47,500.00
Loss of spousal consortium	40.000.00
Loss of parental consortium	1,20,000.00
Rs.40,000 x 3 dependency)
Conventional heads	30,000.00
Total	22,37,500.00

¶56

Thus, the appellants/claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.22,37,500/as against Rs.17,14,600/- awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation therefore amounts to Rs.5,22,900/-. To

¶57

6 -

¶58

NC: 2026:KHC:14923 MFA No. 6294 of 2024

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

this extent, the award passed by the Tribunal requires modification.

¶61

In the result, the following order is passed :

¶62

ORDER

¶63

i. Appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 04.05.2022 passed in MVC No.6409/2019 by the I Additional SCJ and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and I Additional Small Causes Judge and ACMM, Bengaluru, is hereby modified;

¶64

iii. The Insurance Company has already deposited the amount awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.5,22,900/with interest 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶65