Kamalamma and Others vs H.R. Manjunath and Others

N.K. Patil, J.

This is claimants'' appeal filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 15th April 2013 passed in MVC No. 469/2010 on the file of the Principle Senior Civil Judge and MACT-10 at Tumkur (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation.

The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs. 3,44,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit, as against the claim of the claimants for a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/-, on account of the death the deceased of late Sri Murugendraiah, in the road traffic accident.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

The appellants claim that the deceased was aged about 55 years as on the date of accident, hale and healthy prior to the accident and was agriculturist and milk vendor, earning Rs. 47,000/- p.m. Be that as it may, on 3.4.2010 at about 5.30 p.m. one Murugendraiah @ Murugendrappa S/o. late Basappa was proceeding on his bicycle by riding the same on the extreme end of the left side of N.H. 206 road with care and caution by following the rules and when he was proceeding between Kundaranahalli-Sagaranahalli village, at the relevant point of time, one Eicher vehicle bearing Reg. No. KA-51-4863 being driven by its driver with high speed in a rash and negligent manner without following the traffic rules came from back side and dashed against the said Murugendraiah @ Murugendrappa and caused the accident. Due to said accident, the deceased sustained fatal injuries on his head, legs hands, etc., Immediately he was shifted to CHC, Gubbi and after first aid, he was shifted to Shridevi hospital, Tumkur and thereafter he was shifted to Pristine hospital, Bangalore and further shifted to Victoria hospital and while taking treatment in the said hospital the injured died on 10.4.2010 at 5.00 p.m. and thereby the claimants have totally spent Rs. 1,75,000/- towards medicine and other incidental charges. After post mortem the claimants shifted the dead body to their native place by paying Rs. 10,000/- towards vehicle charges and conducted funeral and obsequies of the deceased by spending Rs. 60,000/-. It is further stated that the deceased was owning 4 acres of garden land and in the said land arecanut and coconut trees were grown and from the said trees he was earning Rs. 35,000/- per month and the deceased was also doing milk vending business and earning Rs. 12,000/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family and due to his untimely death, they suffered socially and economically. The claimants are entirely dependent upon the earnings of the deceased and they are suffering from mental shock and agony. The accident in question had occurred only due to rash and negligent driving of the Eicher by its driver. 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. 3,44,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Not being satisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants have presented this appeal, for enhancement of compensation.

The learned counsel Sri Abdul Khadar appearing for the appellants at the outset submits that, the Tribunal has committed an error in taking monthly income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- on the ground that the deceased was having 4 acres of garden land and in the said land arecanut and coconut trees were there and from the said trees he was earning Rs. 35,000/- p.m. and also the deceased was doing milk vending business and earning Rs. 12,000/- p.m. and maintaining his family. He further submitted that the income of the deceased may be re-assessed at Rs. 10,000/- p.m. Due to his un-timely death, claimants have lost their only breadwinner and facing great mental shock and monetary loss and also submitted that the rate of interest awarded at 6% per annum is also on the lower side since the accident is of the year 2010 and therefore, the interest may be enhanced to 9% to 10% per annum. Therefore, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to modified.

As against this, the learned counsel appearing for 2nd respondent sought to substantiate the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal stating that the same is passed after due appreciation of oral and documentary evidence available on record. Therefore, interference by this Court is not called for.

After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arise for consideration is:

"Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?"

It is not in dispute that the deceased died in the road traffic accident. Further it is not in dispute that, the deceased was aged about 55 years at the time of accident, hale and healthy and was working as Agriculturist and also doing milk vending and looking after the welfare of the appellants. Accordingly we reassess the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- p.m. and out of it, if 1/3rd is deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased, it comes to Rs. 4,000/-. In the light of the decision in Sarla Verma''s case, the appropriate multiplier applicable is 11. Accordingly, the appellants are entitled towards loss of dependency at Rs. 5,28,000/- (Rs. 4000 x 12 x 11).

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the wife has lost her life partner at an young age and the minor children have lost the love and affection, inspiration and guidance in life, we deem it fit to award Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, Rs. 30,000/- towards loss of love and affection at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- to each of the appellant, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs. 25,000/- towards funeral and transportation expenses. Further, the compensation awarded towards medical expenses at Rs. 40,000/- is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, the appeal filed by appellants is allowed. The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal dated 15.4.2013 in MVC No. 469/2010 is hereby modified. The total compensation payable comes to Rs. 7,48,000/- as against Rs. 3,44,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

The Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,04,000/- with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Out of the enhanced compensation, Rs. 2,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, in the name of the 1st appellant/wife for a period of ten years and renewable for another ten years, with liberty to her to withdraw the interest accrued on it.

Rs. 75,000/- each with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of 2nd and 3rd appellants till they attain the age of 30 years with liberty to the 1st appellant to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it till they attain the age of 21 years for their welfare and thereafter they are at liberty to withdraw the interest accrued on it periodically.

The remaining Rs. 54,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the 1st appellant, immediately, on deposit by the 2nd respondent-Insurer.

Draw the award, accordingly.