High CourtsSINGLE BENCH

Sharada W/o Shankar vs Deepak S/o Ganapatrao Gajkosh

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 2 August 2017 · Citation: (2017) 08 KAR CK 0008

HON’BLE JUDGES
B. A. Patil
CASE NUMBER
200737 of 2017(MV)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 698 words
1.

This appeal is by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the learned I-Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kalaburagi, in MVC No.462/2015 dated 07.02.2017.

2.

Heard. Appeal is admitted and with the consent of the leaned counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

3.

The learned counsel for the appellants submits that compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. The Tribunal ought to have kept in view the ratio laid down by the Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal and another vs Lala and others reported in 2014 (1) Supreme Court Cases 244 while granting compensation. On these grounds, he prays for allowing the appeal by enhancing the compensation.

4.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3-Insurance company by supporting the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal prays for dismissal of the appeal.

5.

The accident is not in dispute, so also, the involvement of the offending vehicle insured with the respondent-insurance company.

6.

As per the case of the appellants the accident took place on 22.02.2015 at about 4.30 p.m., while Sunil and Arun were going on the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-32/R-6108. When they were opposite to Polakpalli bus stop on Tandur-Chincholli main road, lorry bearing registration No.MH-41/G-5032 came from back side in a high speed rashly and negligently and dashed to the said motorcycle. Due to the said impact, both rider as well as another person sustained grievous injuries and later both died on the spot. As such, the claim petition was filed claiming compensation.

7.

As could be seen from the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the Tribunal taking into consideration the age of the deceased-Arun has awarded a global compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- with interest at 6% per annum by relying upon the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of R.K.Malik and another vs Kiran Pal and others reported in 2009 AIR SCW 4381. In the normal circumstance, though the said award appears to be just and proper, keeping in view the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal and another vs Lala and others reported in (2014) 1 SCC 244, the compensation requires to be enhanced. As per the ratio of the Hon''ble Apex Court, in the case of death of children between the age group of 10 to 15 years, notional income of Rs.30,000/- per annum has to be taken into consideration. In the instant case, the deceased-Arun was aged about 11 years. In view of the said decision, in the instant case also it would be just and reasonable to take the notional income of the deceased at Rs.30,000/- per annum. As the age of the mother is 35 years at the time of the death of the deceased, multiplier of 16 can be applied. If that were to be applied, the appellants are entitled a compensation of Rs.4,80,000/- towards loss of dependency and an amount of Rs.20,000/- is awarded towards other conventional heads. If that were to be awarded, there will be just compensation as held in the decision quoted supra and it would meet the ends of justice. Hence, the appellants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- as against Rs.2,25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

8.

Therefore, taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances of the case, the appellants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.2,75,000/- (two lakhs seventy five thousand only) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal.

9.

Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part and the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.462/2015 is modified to the extent as indicated above.

10.

The respondent-insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and additional compensation awarded by this Court within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

11.

The disbursement, release and deposit of enhanced amount are to be made in terms of the award of the Tribunal. Draw up the award accordingly.