Violet Tauro Vs the National Insurance Co. Ltd.

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.12.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.762/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K., MANGALORE, C/C, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶32

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

¶33

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶34

3 -

¶35

NC: 2026:KHC:6990 MFA No. 9451 of 2015

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶38

Heard the arguments of both sides.

¶39

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 03.12.2014 passed in MVC No.762/2008, by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K. Mangalore, C/C (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short) seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶40

One Anil Tauro, met with an accident on 26.11.2006 and died subsequently. His elder brothers and sisters, who are unmarried filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.16,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,45,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

¶41

Aggrieved by the said award, the present appeal is preferred. It is contended that the deceased-Anil

¶42

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:6990 MFA No. 9451 of 2015

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

Tauro was aged 38 years, working as a cloth merchant and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. Appellant Nos.1 and 4, who are the unmarried sisters of the deceased, were dependent on his income. The Tribunal, however, observed that all the claimants were majors, and they were not dependants and consequently declined to award compensation towards 'loss of dependency', while also deducting 50% towards personal expenses. The Tribunal further failed to consider 'future prospects' and did not award any compensation under the heads of 'loss of estate' and 'loss of love and affection'. The Tribunal only granted Rs.10,000/towards 'funeral expenses', Rs.3,10,000/- towards 'medical expenses' as incurred and Rs.25,000/- towards 'food and conveyance etc. during treatment period'. Hence, the appellants seeks enhancement of the compensation.

¶45

The learned counsel of the respondent relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.7805/2022 (New Insurance Company and

¶46

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:6990 MFA No. 9451 of 2015

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

Anand Pal and others), contending that siblings are not dependents and therefore not entitled to any compensation. In the said judgment, it was observed that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, brothers and sisters cannot be treated as dependants, as they are ordinarily independent and earning, married or dependent upon their parents.

¶49

Per contra , learned counsel of the appellant also relied upon the decision reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 554, Sadhana Thomas and Others Vs. Ashok Kushwaha and Others, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the term " legal representative " has a wider interpretation and calls for a liberal interpretation so as to fulfil the legislative intent. It was held that it is sufficient for a claimant to establish 'loss of dependency' and that a legal representative is one who suffers on account of the death of a person in a motor vehicle accident and therefore, must have a remedy for the realization of compensation. In the said case, it was held that the father

¶50

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:6990 MFA No. 9451 of 2015

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

and the younger sister of the deceased were not financially independent and were dependent on his income. In the present case, the deceased-Anil Tauro's parents are no more and the only claimants are his elder brothers aged 53 and 51 years, arrayed as appellant Nos.2 and 3 and his elder sisters aged 43 and 45 years, arrayed as appellant Nos.1 and 4. The appellants have stated both in their cross-examination and in the grounds of appeal, that they are unmarried and were dependant on the income of the

¶53

deceased.

¶54

It is not in dispute that the parents of the deceased are no more. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that the burden lies upon the claimants to establish loss of dependency and to prove that they were financially dependent on the income of the deceased. In the present case, two other brothers of the deceased are alive and there is no cogent evidence on record to establish that the sisters aged 43 and 45 years, were

¶55

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:6990 MFA No. 9451 of 2015

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

unmarried and financially dependent on the income of the deceased at the time of the accident.

¶58

Learned counsel of the appellants submitted

¶59

that in the cross-examination it has been specifically stated that both the sisters are unmarried despite being aged 43 and 45 years. It is therefore contended that they were dependent on the income of the deceased. In support of the same, the appellants have produced the Legal Heir Certificate-Ex.P-12 issued by the Deputy Tahsildar, wherein both the sisters are shown as unmarried.

¶60

It is stated that the deceased-Anil Tauro was aged 38 years at the time of the accident and working as a cloth merchant and earning Rs.10,000/- per month.

¶61

The Tribunal observed that though the deceased had produced a licence valid from 14.08.1998 to 31.03.1999, the accident occurred in the year 2006 and no documentary proof of income was produced. Therefore, considering that the accident took place in the year 2006,

¶62

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:6990 MFA No. 9451 of 2015

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

notional income of the deceased was taken as Rs.3,500/per month, as per chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The deceased being aged 38 years at the time of the accident, the applicable multiplier is '15'.

¶65

The deceased is entitled to an additional of 40% towards 'future prospects'. The notional income assessed at Rs.3,500/- per month, on addition of 40% (Rs.1,400/-) comes to Rs.4,900/- per month. After deducting 50%

¶66

towards personal expenses, the monthly contribution to the family would be Rs.2,450/-. Applying the multiplier of '15', the loss of dependency works out to Rs.4,900/- x 12 x 15 = Rs.8,82,000/-. Less 50% towards personal expenses = Rs.4,41,000/-. Therefore, the 'loss of dependency works out to Rs.4,41,000/-.

¶67

The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,10,000/- towards 'medical expenses' and Rs.25,000/towards 'funeral' Rs.10,000/- towards 'other expenses'.

¶68

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:6990 MFA No. 9451 of 2015

¶69

HC-KAR

¶70

This Court finds it just and reasonable to confirm the

¶71

amounts granted by the Tribunal.

¶72

Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following compensation:

¶73

Compensation under different heads	Amount in (Rs.)
Future Prospects	4,41,000/-
Medical expenses	3,10,000/-
Food, conveyance etc.,	25,000/-
during treatment period
Funeral and other	10,000/-
expenses
Total	7,86,000/-

¶74

In summary, the appellants/claimants are

¶75

entitled to a total compensation of Rs.7,86,000/- as

¶76

against to Rs.3,45,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation amounts to Rs.4,41,000/-. To

¶77

this extent, the award passed by the Tribunal is modified.

¶78

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶79

10 -

¶80

NC: 2026:KHC:6990 MFA No. 9451 of 2015

¶81

HC-KAR

¶82

ORDER

¶83

i. Appeal is allowed in part.

¶84

ii. The judgment and award dated 03.12.2014 passed in MVC No.762/2008, by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K. Mangalore, C/C, is hereby modified;

¶85

iii. The appellants-claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.4,41,000/(Rs.7,86,000/- minus Rs.3,45,000/-) along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.

¶86

iv. Respondent No.1 is directed to deposit enhanced compensation of Rs.4,41,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶87

11 -

¶88

NC: 2026:KHC:6990 MFA No. 9451 of 2015

¶89

HC-KAR

¶90

v. On such deposit, appellants Nos.1 and 4 are permitted to withdraw the said amount equally.

¶91

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶92

TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43

Violet Tauro v. the National Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Violet Tauro v. the National 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri v Vasu Vs Sri Vinod Kumar.

Susheelamma Vs Narayanagowda M T

The Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Vs Kalidasegowda

Smt Brundha K R Vs Mr Dharshan Gowda S B

Sri Mahesh Vs M/S Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Sri Sharavana Vs Mr M S Subbaiah