Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2023 DIGILAW 1350 (KAR)

Shehanaz Begum v. Rajkumar

2023-12-01

M.G.S.KAMAL

body2023
JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is by the claimants being the legal representatives of deceased Md. Muneer, who died in an accident that occurred on 2/11/2013 involving a lorry DCM bearing Reg. No.KA-38/5844 and another lorry bearing Reg. No.AP-9/T-3927, against the judgment and award dtd. 17/12/2016 passed in MVC No.114/2015 on the file of Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Principal District and Sessions Judge at Bidar (for short 'Tribunal'), by which, while partly allowing the claim petition, the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.12, 04, 000.00 with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation, directing respondent No.2 - Insurance Company to pay the same. 2. The accident in question resulting in death of the deceased is not in dispute. A case in Crime No.123/2014 under Sec. 304-A of IPC was registered against the driver of the offending lorry bearing Reg. No.AP-9/T-3927. 3. The claim petition was filed by the claimants contending that the deceased Muneer aged about 43 years, working as a driver of the lorry bearing Reg. No.KA38/5844 was earning a sum of Rs.15, 000.00 per month as salary being Rs.10, 000.00 and Rs.200.00 being daily bhatta. That, due to the untimely death of the deceased, claimants have put to financial and mental distress. Hence, claimed compensation of Rs.25.00 lakhs. 4. The Tribunal on appreciation of the evidence, assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.9, 000.00 per month. Deducting 1/4th towards his personal and living expenses and applying the multiplier of 14 has awarded a sum of Rs.11, 34, 000.00 towards loss of dependency. In addition, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.20, 000.00 towards loss of consortium, Rs.20, 000.00 towards loss of love and affection, Rs.20, 000.00 towards loss of estate and Rs.10, 000.00 towards funeral expenses, obsequies ceremony, transportation of dead body etc., which is aggregating in a sum of Rs.12, 04, 000.00. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellants are before this Court, seeking enhancement. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. Since the accident in question resulting in death of deceased Muneer leaving behind the claimants as his representatives not being disputed, the only point that requires consideration is the quantum of compensation. Though it is contended that the deceased was having income of Rs.15, 000.00 per month, the Tribunal has assessed the income at Rs.9, 000.00 per month. 6. Since the accident in question resulting in death of deceased Muneer leaving behind the claimants as his representatives not being disputed, the only point that requires consideration is the quantum of compensation. Though it is contended that the deceased was having income of Rs.15, 000.00 per month, the Tribunal has assessed the income at Rs.9, 000.00 per month. The same is held to be just and proper. The Tribunal has however not awarded future prospects. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 , considering the age of the deceased being 43 years, 25% of the income has to be added towards future prospects. Since the deceased left behind 6 dependents, 1/4th needs to be deducted towards his personal and living expenses. Considering the age of the deceased, multiplier of 14' is applied. Calculated as above, the appellants would be entitled for total compensation of Rs.14, 17, 500.00 (Rs.9, 000.00 + 25% x 12 x 14 x 3/4) towards loss of dependency. 7. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram and others reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130 which is subsequently clarified in United India Insurance Co. Ltd., v. Satinder Kaur alias Satwinder Kaur and others reported in AIR 2020 SC 3076 , appellants being wife, children and mother of the deceased respectively are entitled for Rs.40, 000.00 each aggregating in a sum of Rs.2, 40, 000.00 towards loss of consortium. 8. Further, the appellants are entitled for Rs.15, 000.00 towards loss of estate and Rs.15, 000.00 towards funeral expenses. 9. That apart, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), there shall be increment of 10% on the compensation awarded under conventional heads. 10. Thus, the claimants are held entitled for a total compensation of Rs.17, 14, 500.00 instead of Rs.12, 04, 000.00 awarded by the Tribunal as under: 11. For the foregoing reasons, the following: ORDER a) The appeal is partly allowed. 10. Thus, the claimants are held entitled for a total compensation of Rs.17, 14, 500.00 instead of Rs.12, 04, 000.00 awarded by the Tribunal as under: 11. For the foregoing reasons, the following: ORDER a) The appeal is partly allowed. b) The appellants/claimants are held entitled for a total compensation of Rs.17, 14, 500.00 instead of Rs.12, 04, 000.00 awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization. c) Respondent No.2 - Insurance Company shall deposit the aforesaid compensation amount within a period six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. d) The award of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. e) Registry to transmit the Trial Court records to the Tribunal.