Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 1245 (KAR)

Gaja Sinha v. Seema Sinha

2010-12-08

H.S.KEMPANNA, N.K.PATIL

body2010
Judgment :- 1. Admit. These three appeals by the parents, claimants and insurer arise out of the impugned common judgment and award dt. 4th August 2004 passed in MVC No. 2183/98 on the file of the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore (hereinafter referred as “Tribunal” for brevity). The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs.31,82,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation as against the claim of Rs. 76,00,000/- on account of death of last Sri. B.B. Sinha in the road traffic accident. 2. The brief facts of the case are: First claimant is the wife of the deceased. Second claimant is the minor son and respondent Nos. 3 and 4 before the Tribunal are the parents of the deceased. The wife and son of the deceased filed petition under Sec.166 of Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.76,00,000/- on account of the death of late B.B. Sinha in a road traffic accident contending that he was aged about 31 years and was a software engineer working as project leader. He was drawing salary of Rs.29,042/- per month as per Ex.P.22. He was hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the claimants have suffered severally both socially and economically. He being the bread earner of the family, the first claimant has lost her husband at an young age and the second claimant is deprived of love and affection, guidance, inspiration and security. The parents have lost their son at an young age and they have been deprived to see his future career, he being a bright student, working as software engineer. 3. It was contended by the claimants before the Tribunal that at about 10.20 a.m. on 26.3.1998 the deceased was riding his motor cycle bearing registration No. MH 04 2124 on Jayamahal road from north to south direction keeping to his left, observing the traffic rules and regulations and when he reached near Sangam petrol Bunk, in front of M.G. Auto works and Amzer motors, all of a sudden a tanker bearing registration No. KA 06 9945 came from being in a rash and negligent manner at high speed and dashed against the motor cycle of the deceased. As a result the deceased was thrown out from the motor cycle and the left hind wheel of the lorry ran over the deceased and he died on the spot. On account of the untimely death of the deceased the wife and son of the deceased were constrained to file the claim petition under Sec.166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation against the insurer, owner, and driver of the offending vehicle- tanker bearing registration No. KA 06 9945 and also the parents of the deceased. 4. The matter had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal inturn after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on record, allowed the petition in part awarding a sum of Rs.31,82,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. 5. Being dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the parents of the deceased, claimants and insurer felt necessitated to present these three appeals seeking modification of the impugned judgment and award. 6. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents. 7. The submission of Sri S.N. Prashanth Chandra, learned counsel appearing for the appellants parents of the deceased, in MFA No.7809/2004, is that the Tribunal lhas committed grave error and irregularity in not awarding any compensation to the parents of the deceased on account of his death in a road traffic accident. Therefore, he submitted that parents of the deceased are also entitled to just and reasonable compensation by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. 8. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the claimants in MFA No.8500/04 at the outset is that the Tribunal has erred in not considering the future prospects of the deceased at the time of awarding compensation under the head ‘Loss of dependency’. Therefore, it requires modification and reasonable compensation may be awarded after adding the income towards future prospects of the deceased. 9. The learned counsel appearing for the insurer in MFA No.605/05 interalia contended at the outset that fastening of liability on the insurer cannot be sustained on the ground that the driver of the tanker did not possess a valid licence as on the date of accident. 9. The learned counsel appearing for the insurer in MFA No.605/05 interalia contended at the outset that fastening of liability on the insurer cannot be sustained on the ground that the driver of the tanker did not possess a valid licence as on the date of accident. Therefore, the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified by fastening the liability on the owner of the offending vehicle and not on the insurer. 10. After careful consideration of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for all the parties as referred to above, the points that arise for consideration in these appeals are: 1) Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable? 2) Whether the parents of the deceased are entitled to just and reasonable compensation on account of the death of deceased son in road traffic accident? 3) Whether fastening of liability on the insurer is sustainable in law? Re: Point Nos.1 and 2: The undisputed facts of the case are that the occurrence of the accident resulting in death of the deceased. He was aged about 31 years and was working as software engineer getting a salary of Rs.29,042/- p.m. as per salary certificate Ex.P.22. After careful perusal of the salary certificate, it is noticed that the net salary of the deceased after deducting all the allowances is Rs. 25,000/- and the annual income would be Rs.3,00,000/- p.a. Out of which exemption of Rs.65,000/-+Rs.35,000/- towards LIC premium, in all a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- is exempted for the purpose of Income Tax, taking into consideration the year of accident. The remaining amount comes to Rs.2,00,000/- Out of which Rs.40.000/- is deducted towards the income tax. To the balance amount Rs. 1,60,000/- if exemption amount of Rs.1,00,000/- is added, then, the total amount comes to Rs.2,60,000/-. Out of which 1/3rd is deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. The remaining amount comes to Rs.1,73,334/-. The deceased was aged about 31 years. The proper multiplier applicable is 17. Accordingly, we redetermine the compensation under the head’ Loss of dependency’ at Rs.29,46,678/-. 12. 1,60,000/- if exemption amount of Rs.1,00,000/- is added, then, the total amount comes to Rs.2,60,000/-. Out of which 1/3rd is deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased. The remaining amount comes to Rs.1,73,334/-. The deceased was aged about 31 years. The proper multiplier applicable is 17. Accordingly, we redetermine the compensation under the head’ Loss of dependency’ at Rs.29,46,678/-. 12. The Tribunal after assessing the oral and documentary evidence and other relevant materials, has awarded just and reasonable compensation under the conventional heads, i.e.,Rs.20,000/-under the head ‘Loss of consortium’, Rs.20,000/- under the head ‘Loss of expectancy of life’, Rs.50,000/- under the head ‘Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses’ and Rs.20,000/- under the head “Loss of love and affection”. Therefore, the same does not call for interference by this Court. The appellants are entitled to total compensation as follows: Towards loss of dependency Rs.29,46,678/- Towards loss of consortium. Rs. 20,000/- Towards loss of expectancy of life Rs. 20,000/- Towards loss of love and affection Rs. 20,000/- Towards transportation of dead Body and funeral expenses Rs. 50,000/- Total Rs.30,56,678/- Accordingly, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal dt. 4th August 2004 passed in MVC No. 2183/98 is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs.30,56,678/-with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. 13. As rightly pointed by the learned counsel appearing for the parents of the deceased, the Tribunal has committed an error muchless material irregularity in not awarding any compensation to the parents of the deceased. It is the case of the learned counsel appearing for the parents Sri Prashanth Chandra that the mother of the deceased was working as one of the directors of the private company run by the brother of the deceased and due to financial constraints, the said company has been wound up in the year 1998 itself. Therefore, they were entirely dependent upon the income of the deceased and therefore, the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified. 14. There is some substance in the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the parents of the deceased. Therefore, we deem it fit to modify the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal awarding reasonable compensation to the mother of the deceased. Hence, we hereby award Rs.3,00,000/-with interest to the first appellant in MFA No7809/04- Mrs. Gaja Sinha, the mother of the deceased to meet the ends of justice. Therefore, we deem it fit to modify the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal awarding reasonable compensation to the mother of the deceased. Hence, we hereby award Rs.3,00,000/-with interest to the first appellant in MFA No7809/04- Mrs. Gaja Sinha, the mother of the deceased to meet the ends of justice. 15. Re: point No.3: The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-insurer Sri. B.C. Seetharama Rao at the outset submitted that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess valid licence as on the date of the accident. The said stand is taken in paragraph No.2 of the written statement. But, they have not examined the driver nor produced the driving licence to establish that the driver did not possess valid licence as on the date of accident. Therefore, there is no substance or force in the submission of the learned counsel. Hence, it is liable to be rejected. Accordingly, the same is rejected. We uphold the liability fastened on the insurer by the Tribunal. 16. For the foregoing reasons as stated above all the three appeals filed by the parents, claimants and insurer are disposed of. The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal dt. 4.8.2004 in MVC No.2183/98 on the file of the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, is hereby modified holding that the parents of the deceased and claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.30,56,678/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified. The apportionment and the manner of disbursement ordered by Tribunal also is modified. Out of Rs.30,56,678/-, Rs.10,00,000/-with proportionate interest shall be deposited in the name of the claimant No.2- Master Shivendu Sinha @ Sunny till he attains majority in any Nationalised bank or Scheduled bank. Claimant No,1-Mrs. Seema Sinha is entitled to withdraw interest periodically for the welfare of the second claimant. Rs.15.00.000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in any Nationalised bank or Scheduled bank in the name of first claimant for a period of ten years and renewal for another five years with permission to her to withdraw interest periodically. Out of Rs.3,00,000/- awarded to the mother of the deceased, Rs.2,00,000/-with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of mother of the deceased Mrs. Out of Rs.3,00,000/- awarded to the mother of the deceased, Rs.2,00,000/-with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of mother of the deceased Mrs. Gaja Sinha in any Nationalised bank or Scheduled bank for a period of five years and renewal for another five years with permission to her to withdraw interest periodically. Balance amount of Rs.2,56,678/-with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the claimant No.1-Mrs. Seema Sinha and a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the mother of the deceased Mrs. Gaja Sinha on deposit of the said sum by the insurer. The amount deposited by the insurance company shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith. Office to draw the decree accordingly.