AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Though the appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel on both the sides, it is heard finally.
This appeal is preferred by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation by assailing the Judgment and Award passed in MVC No.230/2013 dated 20.11.2014 by Member, MACT No.XII, at Vijayapura.
The brief facts leading to the case are that on; 26.11.2012 at about 10:30 AM when the deceased Shivanand, husband of claimant No.2 was travelling in a Tumtum vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-28/B-1805 to go towards Horti from Bijapur. At that time, a lorry bearing No.TN/34/J-2666 came from behind, in a high speed, rash and negligent manner, as he was unable to control the vehicle, dashed to Tumtum vehicle, in which the deceased Shivanand was proceeding. Due to the accident, deceased Shivanand sustained grievous injuries and he died on the spot. The claimant No.1 being the mother, claimant No.2 being the wife, claimant Nos.3 to 5 being the sons of the deceased Shivanand, have filed claim petition for claiming compensation.
On the basis of rival pleadings, the Tribunal framed the following issues; 1. Whether the petitioners prove that on 26.11.2012 at about 10-00 hrs., when the husband of petitioner No.1''s son was travelling in Tum-Tum bearing No.KA-28-B- 1805 going towards Horti side from Bijapur side, at that time, one lorry bearing No.TN- 34/J-2666 came from hind side in high speed, rash and negligent manner, the driver being unable to control it and dashed to the said Tum-tum caused the accident. On account of said accident, the petitioner No.1''s son has sustained grievous injuries and died?
Whether the respondent No.2 prove that, due to violation of policy conditions, they are not liable to pay the compensation?
Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, how much and from whom?
What order or award?
The Tribunal has answered issue No.1 in the Affirmative, issue No.2 in the Negative, issue No.3 partly in the affirmative and issue No.4 as per final order and awarded compensation of Rs.6,40,000/- with 6% interest from the date of petition till the date of realization. Being aggrieved by the Judgment and Award, the claimants are before this Court.
The learned counsel for the appellants submit that though the deceased was doing business and was earning Rs.10,000/- p.m., the Tribunal has not taken the income of the deceased properly and only by taking notional income of Rs.5,000/- p.m. has awarded an amount of Rs.5,85,000/- towards loss of dependency, which is considered to be on the lower side. He would further contend that the Tribunal has awarded a meager compensation under the conventional heads and they also require to be enhanced. On these grounds, he prayed for allowing the appeal by enhancing the compensation.
The learned counsel for the respondent No.2 vehemently argued and contended by supporting the Judgment and Award that the Tribunal has considered all the aspects and in the absence or proof of any material and by taking into consideration the notional income of Rs.5,000/- and by applying appropriate multiplier and after deducting 1/4th of the income towards personal expenses of the deceased has rightly awarded compensation of Rs.6,40,000/-. Thereby, she requests to confirm the impugned Judgment and Award and prays to dismiss the appeal.
The accident in question is not in dispute. So also the involvement of the offending vehicle is insured with the insurance company is also not in dispute. The Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.5,000/- p.m. and after deducting 1/4th towards the personal expenses and after applying the multiplier of 13 has awarded a sum of Rs.5,85,000/- towards loss of dependency. In the normal course, however, in the absence of documentary evidence with regard to the income of the deceased, overall assessment and keeping in view the avocation and period of accident compensation will have to be made. Admittedly, the accident in question is of the year 2012. During that period in respect of the daily wager earning, the notional income of Rs.6,500/- is the yardstick to be adopted even in Loka Adalath. Therefore, I feel that it is appropriate to adopt the same. In that light, if the income of the deceased is taken at Rs.6,500/- p.m., after deducing 1/4th income of towards personal expenses of the deceased and if the multiplier of 13 if it is applied, then the compensation to be awarded towards loss of dependency would come to Rs.7,60,500/- ( 6500- 1/4th X 12 X13). Hence, the appellants are entitled to said amount.
In addition to that, the compensation awarded under the conventional head appears to be on the lower side. I am of the considered opinion that the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards transportation of dead body and other obsequious functions. Further the appellants are entitled for a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of consortium. An amount of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of love and affection and an amount of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of estate. In all, the claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.9,35,500/-. Since the Tribunal has already awarded a sum of Rs.6,40,000/-, if it is deducted, then the appellants are entitled for additional compensation of Rs.2,95,500/- with interest at the rate of 6% *p.a.
Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part and the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.230/20143 is modified to the extent as indicated above.
The Insurance Company shall deposit the additional amount of compensation awarded by this Court within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment.
The disbursement and apportionment will be as per order of the Tribunal. Draw up the award accordingly. No order as to costs.