Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 380 (KAR)

Annapurnarnma v. G. Ashwathanarayana Babu

2016-04-26

N.K.PATIL, RATHNAKALA

body2016
JUDGMENT : N.K. Patil, J. This appeal by the appellants-claimants is directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 28-9-2015, passed in MVC No. 179/2013. by the C/c. Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hiriyur, (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short), for enhancement of compensation, on the ground that, a sum of Rs. 8,50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under different heads with interest at 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till deposit as against the claim Rs. 25,00,000/- on account of the death of the deceased Sri. Kariyappa, in the road traffic accident is inadequate. 2. In brief, the facts of the case are : The appellants are the wives, daughter, minor son and parents of the deceased. They filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents, on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident, contending that, on 16-12-2011 deceased Kariyappa, along with others was travelling in bus bearing Reg. No. KA. 51.7937 from Hiriyur to Challakere and when the said bus was proceeding near Kalavibagi village gate on SH 19 road, Hiriyur Taluk at 7.30 a.m. the driver of the said bus drove the same in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and lost control over the bus and dashed against the lorry bearing Reg. No. KA.6B.273 and caused the accident. Due to which, deceased sustained grievous blood injuries and died while shifting to district Hospital Chitradurga at about 10.40 a.m. It is the further case of he appellants that, deceased was aged about 40 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, doing agriculture and coolie work and earning ? Rs. 15,000/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family by contributing his entire earnings to the family. 3. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of Rs. 8,50,000/- under different heads with interest at 7.5% p.a., from the date of petition till its deposit. 4. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement. 5. 8,50,000/- under different heads with interest at 7.5% p.a., from the date of petition till its deposit. 4. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement. 5. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and learned counsel for 2nd respondent. 6. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, at the outset is that, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,000/- per month which is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced reasonably between Rs. 7,000/- to Rs. 7,500/- per month on the ground that deceased was aged about 40 years, doing agriculture and coolie work and after deducting 14th towards personal and living expenses and applying 15' multiplier, reasonable compensation may be awarded towards loss of dependency. Further he submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads and the rate of interest awarded at 7.5% p.a. is on the lower side and contrary to the law laid down by the Apex Court and this Court. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified by awarding reasonable compensation. 7. As against this, learned counsel appearing for 2nd respondent, inter alia, contended and substantiated that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, it does not call for interference. 8. After hearing learned counsel appearing for the parties and after careful perusal of the material available on record at threadbare, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our consideration is : Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable? 9. Occurrence of the accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute. It is the case of the appellants that deceased was aged about 40 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, only earning member in the family and doing agriculture and coolie work. The appellants are his wives, daughter, minor son and parents. The Tribunal, has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,000/- per month, which is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced. The appellants are his wives, daughter, minor son and parents. The Tribunal, has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,000/- per month, which is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced. Having regard to the age, occupation of the deceased and the year of accident, we re-assess his income at Rs. 7,000/- per month to meet the ends of justice instead of Rs. 5,000/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal. Out of which, if the (71,750/-) is deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, his contribution to the family comes to Rs. 5,250/- per month. The proper multiplier applicable is 15' since deceased was aged about 40 years as rightly adopted by the Tribunal in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma's ( AIR 2009 SC 3104 ) case. Therefore, we determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 9,45,000/- (75,250/- x 12 x 15) instead of Rs. 6,75,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal and accordingly, it is awarded. 10. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, the compensation awarded towards conventional heads is on the lower side and the same is liable to be enhanced, having regard to the fact that on account of the untimely death of the deceased, who was the only earning member in the family, appellant Nos. 1 and 2, wives have lost their companion, appellant Nos. 3 and 4, children are deprived of the love and affection, guidance and security of their father and appellant Nos. 5 and 6 parents have lost the love and affection and security of their son. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court and this Court, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 3,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- to each of the appellant Nos. 1 to 6, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and 725,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses. In all, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 13,95,000/- instead of Rs. 8,50,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal. 11. 3,00,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 50,000/- to each of the appellant Nos. 1 to 6, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and 725,000/- towards transportation and funeral expenses. In all, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 13,95,000/- instead of Rs. 8,50,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal. 11. Regarding rate of interest, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, 7.5% interest per annum awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side, since the accident is of the year 2011. In the light of the judgment of Apex Court and this Court, we award the rate of interest at 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation instead of 7.5% awarded by the Tribunal. There would be an enhancement of Rs. 5,45,000/- with interest at 9% p. a. on the enhanced compensation awarded from the date of petition till its realization. 12. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellants is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 28-9-2015, passed in MVC No. 179/2013, by the C/c. Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hiriyur, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 5,45,000/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization. 13. 2nd respondent is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 5,45,000/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realisation within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. 14. Immediately on such deposit by the 2nd respondent/insurer, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 5,45,000/-, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of appellant No. 1, wife of the deceased, in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, for a period of 10 years, renewable by another 10 years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically. 15. Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of appellant No. 1, wife of the deceased, in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, for a period of 10 years, renewable by another 10 years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically. 15. Rs. 2,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of appellant No. 4, in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, till he attains 30 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant No. 2, mother of appellant No. 4 to withdraw the interest accrued on it, till he attains 22 years for his welfare and from 23 years to 30 years, he is at liberty to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically. 16. A sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in the name of appellant No. 5, mother of the deceased, in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank, for a period of 5 years, renewable by another 5 years, with liberty reserved to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically. 17. Remaining sum of Rs. 1,45,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant Nos.1, 5 and 6 in equal portion immediately. 18. Draw the award accordingly.