Ramachandra and Others vs Annappa and Others

A.S. Pachhapure, J.—The appellants dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded for the death of Malakappa and injury to Sayappa in a motor vehicle accident, have filed these appeals seeking enhancement of compensation. The occurrence of the accident, rash and negligent driving and the finding arrived in that regard are not in dispute.

When Malakappa (the deceased) and the injured Sayappa were travelling in the auto rickshaw bearing registration No. KA-14/A-3648, an accident occurred on 30.12.2009 in collusion with Maruti car bearing registration No. KA-14/N-1037. Malakappa sustained severe injuries and died whereas Sayappa suffered grievous injuries and disability.

The legal representatives of Malakappa and injured have filed the claim petitions in MVC Nos. 516/2010 and 517/2010. All the cases arising out of the same accident were clubbed and common evidence was permitted.

The tribunal held the drivers of both vehicles negligent to an extent of 75% and 25% and granted a sum of Rs. 4,60,000/- as compensation in death case and Rs. 61,780/- as compensation in the case of injury. Dissatisfied with the sum awarded by the tribunal, these appeals have been filed.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The point that arise for my consideration is:

"Whether the appellants are entitled to enhanced compensation? If so, to what extent?" 7. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that the assessment of income, amount of compensation on each of the heads is on the lower side and seeks enhancement. On the other hand, learned counsel for the insurer supports the judgment and award and submits that the tribunal has granted just compensation and no grounds are made out to call for interference.

MFA No. 32455/2012 (MVC No. 517/2010)

Malakappa the deceased was a labour contractor. He left behind him his parents, wife and three minor children. The tribunal has assessed his income at Rs. 3,000/- per month. The accident is of the year 2009. Generally, a sum of Rs. 4,750/- is considered as the income of a labourer in the Lok Adalats with the consent of the parties. The deceased Malakappa was a labour contractor and it would be just and proper to consider his income at Rs. 5,000/- per month. 1/4th has to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased as there are six dependents were claiming compensation. The net contribution per month would be Rs. 3750/-. The multiplier to be adopted is 16 as the deceased was 30 years old. The net compensation towards loss of dependency would be (3,750 x 16 x 12) Rs. 7,208,000/-. Deducting a sum of Rs. 4,32,000/- awarded by the tribunal. The appellants are entitled to Rs. 2,88,000/- towards loss of dependency.

The tribunal has granted a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of expectancy in life and it can be adjusted with loss to estate.

Only a sum of Rs. 10,000/- has been granted towards loss of love and affection. There are six dependents claiming compensation and it would be just and proper to award a sum of Rs. 50,000/- on this head. Deducting a sum of Rs. 10,000/- awarded by the tribunal. The appellants are entitled to Rs. 40,000/- on this head.

No compensation is granted towards loss of consortium and company. As the widow was 26 years old, three minor children and there are no chances of her remarriage. I think it is just and proper to award a sum of Rs. 60,000/- on this head.

The tribunal has granted only a sum of Rs. 8,000/- towards funeral expenses and medical expenses and an additional sum of Rs. 7,000/- would be just and reasonable amount on this head. Thereby, the appellants are entitled to compensation as follows:

The appellants are entitled to the aforesaid sum with interest at 9% per annum.

MFA No. 32456/2012 (MVC No. 516/2010)

The appellant has suffered the fracture of right femur, tibia, fibula and other injuries. Only a sum of Rs. 6,000/- has been granted towards pain and suffering. As the appellant has suffered three fractures, I think it would be just and proper to award a sum of Rs. 45,000/- on this head. Deducting a sum of Rs. 6,000/- awarded by the tribunal. The appellant is entitle to Rs. 39,000/- on this head.

Only a sum of Rs. 1,700/- has been granted towards medical and incidental expenses and no compensation has been granted towards food, nourishment and conveyance charges. Totally, a sum of Rs. 3,000/- is awarded on these heads.

Only a sum of Rs. 5,000/- has been granted towards loss of amenities. The tribunal has assessed the disability at 8%. The appellant has suffered the fracture of right femur, tibia and fibula. The doctor has assessed the disability at 40% to 45%. Generally, the disability is treated for a particular limb as 13% to the whole body. Considering this aspect of the matter, it is just and proper to assess the disability at 13%. In the aforesaid circumstances, a sum of Rs. 13,000/- is awarded on this head. Deducting a sum of Rs. 5,000/- awarded by the tribunal. The appellant is entitled to Rs. 8,000/- on this head.

The tribunal has granted a sum of Rs. 46,080/- towards loss of earning capacity. Now the disability is taken at 13%, the income is taken at Rs. 4,750/- and the multiplier applicable is 16. Thereby, the compensation towards loss of earning capacity would be Rs. 1,18,560/-. Deducting a sum of Rs. 46,080/- awarded by the tribunal. The appellant is entitled to Rs. 72,480/- on this head.

A sum of Rs. 3,000/- has been granted towards loss of earning, attendance and incidental charges. When the appellant has suffered three fractures, three months time is required to assume the normal duties after healing of the fractures. Hence, he is entitled to a sum of Rs. 14,250/- towards loss of income during treatment period. Deducting a sum of Rs. 3,000/- awarded by the tribunal. The appellant is entitled to Rs. 11,250/- on this head. Thereby, the appellant is entitled to compensation as follows:

The appellant is entitled to aforesaid sum with interest at 9% per annum. Hence, the point is answered in the affirmative.

The tribunal has held that 75% of the compensation with interest has to be paid by 2nd respondent and remaining compensation by 4th respondent. The finding of the tribunal is just and proper. Therefore, the compensation enhanced has to be paid by respondent No. 2 and 4 under the same proportion.

Consequently, the appeals are allowed in part.

In MFA No. 32455/2012, the appellants are entitled to Rs. 3,95,000/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till its payment in addition to the compensation awarded by the tribunal.

The distribution of the compensation shall be done as per the formula adopted by the tribunal. The enhanced share of appellant No. 3-Kashibai shall be deposited in her name in any nationalized bank for a period of five years. The share of minors shall be kept in fixed deposit in any nationalized bank until they attain the age of majority. The amount of other appellants shall be paid to them.

In MFA No. 32456/2012, the appellant is entitled to Rs. 61,250/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till its payment in addition to the compensation awarded by the tribunal.

The amount of compensation enhanced shall be deposited in the name of the appellant in any nationalized bank for a period of five years.