Smt Ashwitha Vs Manoja

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.04.06.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.189/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MACT, SAGAR, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶28

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

¶29

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶30

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶31

This appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 04.06.2024 passed in MVC No.189/2022, by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sagar, for enhancing the compensation.

¶32

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:13686 MFA No. 8567 of 2024

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

Heard the arguments of learned counsel for

¶35

respondent No.2 and learned counsel for the appellants.

¶36

Brief facts of the case are that, Sri. Divakar, met with an accident on 02.08.2021. His wife and mother filed claim application claiming compensation of Rs.73.25 lakhs along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted Rs.24,11,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed.

¶37

It is contended that the deceased Divakar, was earning Rs.20,000/- p.m. Due to his untimely death, the petitioners have suffered loss of dependency and affection. The vehicle was duly insured with respondent No.2 and the policy was in force. However, his monthly income has been wrongly assessed. It is submitted that the deceased Divakar was working as salesman in Amazon and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. Further, the Tribunal has

¶38

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:13686 MFA No. 8567 of 2024

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

awarded a meagre compensation under conventional heads and erred in granting interest at the rate of 9% instead of 12%. Therefore, the appellants have requested for enhancement of compensation.

¶41

Divakar was aged 45 years and the multiplier is to be taken as ‘15’. Though the appellants have stated that the Divakar was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, they have not filed a single document to prove his income. Since the accident occurred on 02.08.2021, this Court finds it reasonable to take his notional income as Rs.15,000/- per month, as per the guidelines issued by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. As per the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others¹ 40% is to be added towards future prospectus and as per the guidelines of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the

¶42

case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation² ,

¶43

1/3^rd is to be deducted towards personal expenses.

¶44

1 (2017) 16 SCC 680

¶45

2 (2009) 6 SCC 121

¶46

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:13686 MFA No. 8567 of 2024

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

Accordingly, the 'loss of dependency' come to Rs.25,20,000/- (15,000 + 40% - 1/3rd X 12 X 15). Petitioner No.1 being the wife of deceased, is entitled to Rs.44,000/- under the head 'loss of consortium' and Petitioner No.2 being the mother of the deceased is entitled to Rs.44,000/- under the head 'filial consortium' for the loss of his grown-up son. Apart from that, the appellants are also entitled for Rs.33,000/- towards 'conventional heads' as per the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Other .

¶49

Thus in all, components awarded by this Court

¶50

are as below,

¶51

Particulars	Amount in Rs.
Loss of dependency	25,20,000.00
Loss of consortium	44,000.00
Loss of filial consortium	44,000.00
Conventional heads	33,000.00
Medical bills	2,62,700.00
Total	29,03,700.00

¶52

6 -

¶53

NC: 2026:KHC:13686 MFA No. 8567 of 2024

¶54

HC-KAR

¶55

Compensation is enhanced from Rs.24,11,000/-

¶56

to Rs.29,03,700/- and the enhanced compensation is Rs.4,92,700/-, which carries interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Further, the insurance company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal.

¶57

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶58

ORDER

¶59

i. The appeal is allowed in part .

¶60

ii. The judgment and award dated 04.06.2024 passed in MVC No.189/2022, by the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and JMFC and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sagar, is modified;

¶61

iii. Therefore, respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.4,92,700/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum within one month from the date of this order and

¶62

iv. On such deposit, appellant No.1/wife of the deceased alone is permitted to withdraw

¶63

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:13686 MFA No. 8567 of 2024

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

the entire compensation with interest accrued on it.

¶66

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶67

SSD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74

Smt Ashwitha v. Manoja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Ashwitha v. Manoja

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Bharani. C Vs Royal Sundaram General Insurance Company Ltd.

Sri. Abhishek. K @ Abhishek Vs Smt. Savitha

Shri Harish G R Vs Shri K M Lokesh

Mr Chittaranjan Vs Mr Radhakrishna

Kumari Kanishka R Vs United India Insurance Company Ltd.

Smt. a Rekha Vs Sri. G K Sridhar