AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Mohan M. Shantana Goudar, J.—MFA No. 30515/2013 is filed by the claimants praying for enhancement of compensation. MFA No. 30951/2012 is filed by the Insurance Company praying for reduction.
By consent, both the appeals are heard together and decided by the following order:
Ramesh S/o. Ningappa Vandal aged about 22 years lost his life in an accident that has occurred on 06.04.2006. Claimants are the mother and dependent sisters as well as brother of the deceased. According to the claimants, the deceased was the cleaner, whereas the according to the Insurance Company the deceased was a coolie by profession. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 5,60,000/- with interest at 6% per annum thereon.
The fact that the claimants were dependents on the deceased is not seriously disputed before the Tribunal. Claimant No. 1 is the mother of the deceased. Claimant Nos. 2 and 3 are the unmarried sisters of the deceased and claimant No. 4 is a minor younger brother of the deceased, all of them were dependents on the deceased. The father of the deceased namely Ningappa Vandal is said to have been residing separately from the claimants.
Sri R.V. Nadagouda, learned Advocate for the Insurance Company submits that the Court below is not justified in taking Rs. 4,500/- as monthly income of the deceased particularly when the accident taken place in the year 2006 and the deceased was a coolie. On the other hand, it is the case of the claimants that the deceased was cleaner and he was earning Rs. 6,000/- per month.
In our considered opinion, since there is no material to show the exact income of the deceased, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs. 4,500/- per month (i.e. Rs. 150/- per day). Taking the age of the mother of the deceased, multiplier 15 is adopted. In that context, Sri R.V. Nadagouda, submits that the deceased himself was 22 years and therefore, it is unnatural that his mother was aged about 38 years during the relevant period. The submission of learned Advocate for the Insurance Company appears to be attractive at the first instance. Even assuming that the mother is aged about 40, the multiplier remains the same at 15. In view of the same, we do not find any ground to modify the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is also justified in deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased particularly when there were four dependents on the deceased. Since the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper no interference is called for. Appeals fail and both are dismissed.