Smt. T.R. Vanitha and Chi. H. Vikas and Chi. H. Vishal V. The New India Assurance Co Ltd and Amith Transport Corporation

MFA/10397/2008

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the claimants, Smt. T.R. Vanitha and her two minor children, against the judgment and award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Bangalore, which partially allowed their claim for compensation due to the death of their husband and father, Sri V. Hanume Gowda, in a road traffic accident. The Tribunal awarded Rs.50,47,000/- as compensation, which the claimants found inadequate as they had claimed Rs.1,00,00,000/-. The appeal sought an enhancement of the compensation amount. The High Court, after re-evaluating the income and applying the appropriate multiplier and adding 30% for future prospects as per the Supreme Court's guidelines in Sarla Verma's case, increased the compensation to Rs.52,12,876/-.

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 690493 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 03-01-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Sarla Verma's case (2009 ACJ 1298)
• Laws Referred To: Motor Vehicles Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: R JAIPRAKASH
• Assessee Lawyers: G K VIDYA
• Keywords: Compensation Enhancement; Future prospects; Loss of dependency; Road traffic accident; Multiplier application
• Section: 166; 173(1)

Judgement Text

" 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY OF JANUARY, 2013 :PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. PATIL AND THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.S.INDRAKALA M.F.A.NO.10397/2008 (MV) BETWEEN: 1. SMT.T.R.VANITHA W/O LATE SRI V HANUME GOWDA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 2. CHI.H.VIKAS S/O LATE SRI V HANUME GOWDA AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS 3. CHI.H.VISHAL S/O LATE SRI V HANUME GOWDA AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS APPELLANT NOS.2 & 3 SINCE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN APPELLANT NO.1 ALL ARE RESIDING AT.NO.1738, IST ‘D’ MAIN, 2ND STAGE, 2ND BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR BANGALORE – 560 010. ... APPELLANTS (BY SMT.G.K.SREE VIDYA, FOR SRI.T.N.VISWANATHA, ADVOCATE) 2 AND: 1. M/S THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE 2-B, UNITY BUILDING ANNEX, MISSION ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027. 2. M/S.AMITH TRANSPORT CORPORATION NO.4, KIMSON BUILDING, 2ND MAIN ROAD, K.P.M.EXTENSION BANGALORE - 560 002. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.R.JAIPRAKASH, ADVOCATER FOR R1, R2 SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 04.05.2007 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1806/2004 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES & MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, N.K. PATIL, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: :J U D G M E N T: This appeal is by the claimants being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award dated 4.5.2007 passed in MVC No. 1806/2004 on the file of the Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes & Member, MACT, Bangalore. 3 2. The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs.50,47,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization as against the claim made by the appellants for Rs.1,00,00,000/- on account of the death of the deceased late Sri V. Hanume Gowda in a road traffic accident. Claiming that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and it requires enhancement, the present appeal is filed. 3. The brief facts of the case are: Claimant No.1 - wife and claimant Nos. 2 and 3 - minor children have filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a compensation of Rs. 1 Crore on account of the untimely death of the deceased in the road traffic accident that occurred at about 3.30 p.m. on 29.2.2004 contending that when the deceased was travelling in an Ambassador car bearing Registration 4 No. KA-01-AA-1001 on B.M. Road towards Bangalore, near Mallarabanawadi Gate, at that time all of a sudden a Tata 709 vehicle bearing No. KA-01-D-1895 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner with high speed without observing traffic rules and regulations came from the opposite direction and dashed against the car. Due to which the deceased sustained multiple injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the way to the hospital. It is the further case of the appellants that the deceased was aged about 45 years, by profession he was an Assistant Professor, working in Dr. Ambedkar Institute of Technology, Bangalore and also working part time in Annai University, Chennai by prosecuting P.Hd., course as well as he was getting substantial income for preparing question papers for the examination and valuation of the same and he was very bright having good future and scope in getting any premium post of the University. He was their hope, future and bread 5 earner in the family and whatever he used to earn, he used to spend substantially towards the welfare of the family. The 1st appellant has lost her life partner at the young age of 45 years and minor children have lost love and affection, guidance and security of their father. Taking all these facts into consideration, they were constrained to file a claim petition against the respondents/owner and insurer of the offending vehicle. 4. The said matter had come for consideration before the Tribunal and the Tribunal in turn after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record and after evaluation of the income tax returns filed by the appellants/claimants herein as per Ex.P.19 and salary certificate – Exs.P. 26, Fees Certificate – Ex.P. 23 etc., has assessed the income of the deceased at the rate of Rs.48,000/- per month. Deducting 1/3rd towards his personal expenses and applying the appropriate multiplier of ‘13’ has 6 awarded a sum of Rs.49,92,000/- towards loss of dependency, Rs.55,000/- towards conventional head and in all a total compensation of Rs.50,47,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization was awarded. Being dis-satisfied with the same, the claimants have presented this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 5. The learned Counsel for the claimants/appellants at the outset submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in taking the income of the deceased and applying the appropriate multiplier for determination of loss of dependency which is on the lower side. Further he vehemently contended that in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma’s case (2009 ACJ 1298) since the age of the deceased was 45 years, working as a Professor and getting income from three sources, another 30% of the income has to be added towards future prospects of the deceased and further applying 7 the appropriate multiplier of ‘14’, just and reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency may be awarded by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. 6. As against this, the learned Counsel for the 1st respondent/insurer substantiating the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal interalia contended that the Tribunal was justified in awarding the compensation after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record and hence interference by this Court is not called for. However, he fairly submitted that in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sarla Verma’s case (supra), another 30% of the income is to be added to the income of the deceased towards future prospects of the deceased and hence re-determination of compensation towards loss of dependency by applying the multiplier of ‘14’ in accordance with law is just and necessary. 8 7. After careful consideration of the learned Counsel appearing for both parties and after evaluation of the entire material available on the file and on perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for consideration is: “Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?” 8. The occurrence of the accident and resultant death of the deceased late Sri V. Hanume Gowda in the road traffic accident that occurred on 29.2.2004 are not in dispute. Further that the deceased was working as an Assistant Professor in Dr. Ambedkar Institute of Technology, Bangalore and also by prosecuting P.Hd., in Anna Malai University, Chennai, he used to get stipend and being the Assistant Professor, he was one of the selected examiner for preparing the question papers for the University. It is also not in dispute that the deceased was an income 9 tax assessee as per the income tax returns filed, which is made available to the Tribunal. Therefore, we can safely assess the income at the rate of Rs.5,74,749/- p.a. and deducting income tax, other professional and admissible taxes i.e., Rs.1,48,825/- the net income comes to Rs. 4,25,924/- p.a. and if another 30% is added towards future prospects of the deceased, it comes to Rs. 5,53,701/- p.a. (Rs.4,25,924/- + Rs.1,27,777/-) in view of the law laid down in the Sarla Verma’s case supra. Out of which if 1/3rd is deducted towards his personal expenses since the claimants are 3 in number i.e., wife and two minor children, the net income comes to Rs.3,69,134/- p.a. Since the deceased was aged about 45 years, the appropriate multiplier applicable is ‘14’ following the judgment of the Apex Court supra. Accordingly, we re-determine and award the loss of dependency at the rate of Rs.51,67,876/- (Rs.3,69,134/- x 14). 10 9. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs.45,000/- under conventional head towards loss of consortium, loss of estate, loss of love and affection, Transportation, funeral, obsequies and other expenses. 10. In all the claimants are entitled for Rs.52,12,876/- as against Rs.50,47,000/- awarded by the tribunal with interest @ 6% p.a. on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realisation. 11. Accordingly, we pass the following: ORDER The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 4.5.2007 passed by the MACT, Bangalore in MVC No. 1806/2004 is hereby modified enhancing the amount by Rs.1,65,876/- with interest @ 6% p.a. on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realisation. 11 The 1st respondent/insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation within a period of 3 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment excluding the interest for the delayed period of 389 days in filing the appeal. Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,65,876/-, a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized / Schedule Bank, in the name of appellant Nos.2 and 3 till they attain the age of 30 years, with liberty to appellant No.1 to withdraw the interest accrued on it periodically for the welfare of the appellant Nos. 2 and 3. From the age of 19 years onwards, appellant Nos. 2 and 3 are entitled to withdraw the interest periodically till the age of 30 years. 12 The remaining Rs. 65,876/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of appellant No.1 immediately, on deposit by the 1st respondent/insurer. Office to draw the award accordingly. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE Nsu "