Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 797 (KAR)

M. T. Mangala v. Manjegowda M. R.

2017-04-25

B.MANOHAR

body2017
JUDGMENT : B. Manohar, J. Appellants/claimants being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in the judgment and award dated 20-12-2011 made in MVC No. 503/2011 passed by the MACT, Hassan, (for short hereinafter referred to as ' the Tribunal-) have filed this appeal seeking for enhancement of compensation. 2. Claimants are the wife, two minor children and parents of the deceased Puttaraju. They filed the claim petition contending that on 25-12-2010 at about 10:30 p.m., while the deceased Puttaraju was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing registration No. KA-02-EL-808 from Bhuvanaballi towards Hassan, at that time, the rider of motorcycle bearing registration No. KA-04-EM-3115 rode the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased. Due to the impact, the deceased fell down and sustained injuries all over the body. Immediately after the accident, one of the pedestrian took him to S.C. Hospital, Hassan and as advised by the doctor, he was shifted to SSM Hospital and later he succumbed to injuries during the course of treatment. Hence, the claimants sought for compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/-. 3. In the claim petition, the claimants contended that the deceased was working in a garment factory and earning Rs. 12,000/- per month. In view of the death of the deceased, the claimants have lost the bread earner due to the negligence on the part of rider of the offending motorcycle which was insured with respondent No.2. Both the respondents are liable to pay the compensation. 4. In response to the notice issued by the Tribunal, the owner of the motorcycle bearing No. KA-04-EM-3115 though served with notice remained unrepresented. The Insurance company entered appearance and filed written statement and defend the case. 5. After trial, the tribunal held that due to the actionable negligence on the part of the rider of the motorcycle bearing No. KA-04-EM-3115, the accident occurred and the claimants are the dependents of the deceased. Hence, they are entitled for compensation. 6. With regard to quantum of compensation is concerned, though the claimants claim that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs. - 12,000/- per month by working as a Supervisor in Jeans Knit Pvt. Ltd., have produced the salary certificate to that effect, but have not examined the author of the salary certificate. In view of the same, the Tribunal taking the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. - 12,000/- per month by working as a Supervisor in Jeans Knit Pvt. Ltd., have produced the salary certificate to that effect, but have not examined the author of the salary certificate. In view of the same, the Tribunal taking the monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 4,000/-, deducting th of the income of the deceased towards his personal expenses and since the deceased was aged about 32 years at the time of his death applying the multiplier of 16', has awarded Rs. 5,76,000/- towards 'loss of dependency'. Further, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards 'loss of consortium', Rs. 10,000/- towards 'loss of love and affection', Rs. 10,000/- towards 'loss of estate and Rs. 10,000/- towards ' funeral expenses'. The tribunal, has awarded total compensation of Rs. 6,16,000/- with interest at 6% per annum. Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants have preferred this appeal. 7. I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the parties. Pursued the judgment and award and oral and documentary evidence. 8. The dispute in this appeal is only with regard to quantum of compensation is concerned. Though the claimants have not produced any document to substantiate their evidence that the deceased was earning Rs. 12,000/- per month by working as supervisor at Jeans Knit Pvt. Ltd., the Tribunal ought to have taken reasonable income. Even for the daily wage employees working in various Govt. Department and also in Lok Adalath, the income is being taken at Rs. 5,500/- per month. Since the accident occurred in the year 2010, the income of the deceased can be taken at Rs. 5,500/- per month. Therefore, the claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs. 7,92,000/- ( Rs. 5,500 x 12 x 16 x ) towards 'loss of dependency as against Rs. 5,76,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh & Ors. v. Rajbir Singh & Ors., reported in 2013 ACJ 1403 , the wife, who has lost her husband at her young age is entitled for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards 'loss of consortium'. Further, the claimants are entitled for Rs. 25,000/- towards 'loss of love and affection' of the minor children and a sum of Rs. 40,000/- towards 'conventional heads'. 1,00,000/- towards 'loss of consortium'. Further, the claimants are entitled for Rs. 25,000/- towards 'loss of love and affection' of the minor children and a sum of Rs. 40,000/- towards 'conventional heads'. Thus, in all the claimants are entitled for following compensation:- Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency 7,92,000 Loss of consortium 1,00,000 Loss of love and affection 25000 Conventional heads 40000 TOTAL 9,57,000 9. Accordingly, I pass the following:- ORDER (i) Appeal is allowed in part and the judgment and award made in MVC No. 503/2011 dated :- 20-12-2011 passed by the MACT, Hassan is modified and the claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs. 9,57,000/- with interest at 6% per annum as against Rs. 6,16,000/- awarded by the tribunal.