Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 1108 (KAR)

Alice Varkey v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

2010-10-25

H.S.KEMPANNA, N.K.PATIL

body2010
JUDGMENT : N.K. Patil, J. This appeal is filed by one of claimants challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 4th March 2005, passed in M.V.C. No. 3678/2003, by the XIX Additional SCJ and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-17) (for short, 'Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 5,81,000/- awarded as against their claim for Rs. 16.00 lakhs, is inadequate. 2. The facts in brief are that, the Appellant being the wife of the deceased Late Sri. M.M. Varkey, and their children, who are Respondents 3 and 4 herein had filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that at about 3:30 P.M. on 17-05-2003, the deceased M.M. Varkey was proceeding on his bicycle to his house after completing his duty from Airforce Training College, Jalahalli West. When the bicycle was moving on the extreme left side of S.M. Road, near Fathima Church, a car bearing No. KA-04/P-4733 being driven by its driver, in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind and dashed against the bicycle of the deceased. Due to the impact, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same in Command Hospital at 6:45 A.M. on the same day. 3. It is the case of the Appellant that, the deceased was aged about 57 years, working as Warrant Officer in Indian Air Force at Airforce Technical College and drawing salary of Rs. 14,776/- per month and was an income tax Assessee. It is her further case that, on account of his untimely death, the family has become haywire and she has lost the life partner and social security and therefore, she has to be compensated adequately. 4. On account of the death of the deceased in the accident, the Appellant and her two children, who are Respondents 3 and 4 herein, filed the claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation of a sum of Rs. 16.00 lakhs against the Respondents 1 and 2 herein. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 4th March 2005. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available on file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a sum of Rs. 5,81,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available on file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a sum of Rs. 5,81,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, on the ground that the same is inadequate, the Appellant is in appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation. 5. We have heard learned Counsel for Appellant and learned Counsel for Insurance Company, for considerable length of time. 6. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties and after perusal of the judgment and award passed by Tribunal, including the original records placed before us, we are of the view that, the occurrence of accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that he was aged about 57 years and working as Warrant Officer at Airforce Technical College, drawing salary of Rs. 14,776/- per month or Rs. 1,77,312/- per annum. Out of which, professional tax and income tax are to be deducted. Accordingly, if a total sum of Rs. 18,200/- is deducted under the said heads, the net income comes to Rs. 1,59,112/- per annum. The appropriate multiplier applicable, having regard to the age of the deceased is, 9' as per Sarla Verma's case. Having regard to the number of dependents, 1/3rd (i.e. Rs. 53,037/-) has to be deducted from Rs. 1,59,112/- and after the said deduction, it comes to Rs. 1,06,075/- per annum. In the light of the well settled law laid down by this Court, in the case of Union of India and others Vs. K.S. Lakshmi Kumar and Others, , loss of dependency, in this case has to be arrived at by adopting split multiplier. Accordingly, since the deceased was left with another three years of service, split multiplier of 3' has to be applied for a sum of Rs. 1,06,075/-, which comes to Rs. 3,18,225/- and thereafter, after deducting 50% from Rs. 1,06,075/-, multiplier of 6' has to be adopted, which comes to Rs. 3,18,225/-. Accordingly, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 3,18,225/- (i.e. Rs. 1,06,075/- x'3') plus Rs. 3,18,225/- (i.e. Rs. 1,06,075/- x'6'), which comes to Rs. 6,36,450/- as against Rs. 5,56,000/- awarded by Tribunal. 7. 3,18,225/- and thereafter, after deducting 50% from Rs. 1,06,075/-, multiplier of 6' has to be adopted, which comes to Rs. 3,18,225/-. Accordingly, the total loss of dependency works out to Rs. 3,18,225/- (i.e. Rs. 1,06,075/- x'3') plus Rs. 3,18,225/- (i.e. Rs. 1,06,075/- x'6'), which comes to Rs. 6,36,450/- as against Rs. 5,56,000/- awarded by Tribunal. 7. Further, the Tribunal has rightly awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of consortium, but erred In not awarding reasonable compensation under the other conventional heads. The deceased has left behind his wife and two children. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we award a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of love and affection; a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses; and a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of life expectancy/loss of estate as against the compensation of Rs. 15,000/- awarded by Tribunal towards funeral expenses and loss of estate. 8. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the appeal filed by Appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 4th March 2005, passed in M.V.C. No. 3678/2003, by the XIX Additional SCJ and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-17), is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 6,81,450/- as against Rs. 5,81,000/-awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at 6% per annum on the enhanced sum, from the date of petition till the date of realization. The break-up is as follows: Towards Loss of Dependency - Rs. 6,36,450/- Towards Loss of love and affection - Rs. 15,000/- Towards Loss of estate/loss of expectancy - Rs. 10,000/- Towards loss of consortium - Rs. 10,000/- Towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses - Rs. 10,000/- TOTAL - Rs. 6,81,450/- The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,00,450/-, with interest thereon at 6% per annum, within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment and award. Immediately on such deposit by the Insurance Company, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,00,450/-, 50% of it with proportionate interest, shall be invested in Fixed Deposit, in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, in the name of the Appellant - wife of deceased, for a period of three years, renewable for another three years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest periodically. 1,00,450/-, 50% of it with proportionate interest, shall be invested in Fixed Deposit, in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, in the name of the Appellant - wife of deceased, for a period of three years, renewable for another three years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest periodically. Remaining 50% of enhanced compensation with proportionate interest, shall be released in favour of the Appellant, immediately. Office to draw award, accordingly.