AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—Though this matter is posted for orders, the same is taken up for final disposal with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties. This appeal by the claimants is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 22.12.2011 passed in MVC No. 7891/2010 on the file of the MACT-V, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore city.
The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization after deducting 25% contributory negligence on the part of the deceased Parameshwar Gowda on account of his death in the road traffic accident.
The claimants have presented this appeal on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and fixing 25% contributory negligence is on the higher side and is liable to be modified, by enhancing the compensation amount.
The brief facts of the case on hand are, appellant No. 1 is the wife and appellants 2 to 4 are the children of the deceased. They have filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the MV Act claiming compensation of Rs. 20,00,000/- on account of untimely death of the deceased in the road traffic accident that occurred on 19.9.2010 at about 2.30 p.m. When he was waiting to cross the road near Udayapura Kamath Hotel on NH-48, Channarayapatna, at that time, a Toyota Innova car bearing registration No. KA-05/AB-158 came from Bangalore side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him, on account of which, he sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. According to the claimants, the deceased was aged 66-70 years and was hale and healthy prior to accident. He was the Kartha of the family. On account of the untimely death of the deceased in the road traffic accident, the social and economic condition of the family is affected and they have suffered pain and agony and there is no one to guide them and to do agricultural operations. On all these relevant grounds, they have filed claim petition claiming compensation against the respondents before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides and after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, has held that accident was due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle fixing 75 % contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the Innova car, and 25% contributory negligence on the part of the deceased and awarded Rs. 1,50,000/- with 6% interest from the date of petition till its realization. Being dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed, the appellants/claimants have filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
Sri K T Gurudeva Prasad appearing for Sri Pradeep Naik K, learned counsel for appellants, at the outset submitted that the Tribunal has erred in taking the income of the deceased at only Rs. 4,000/- per month and the same is on the lower side and requires assessment and further the contributory negligence of 25% fixed on the deceased is also on the higher side and the same is liable to be reduced to 10% and reasonable compensation be awarded towards loss of dependency and conventional heads by modifying the impugned judgment and award. Further the learned counsel for the appellants vehemently submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable rate of interest. The accident is of the year 2010. In view of the well settled law of the Apex Court and this Court, at least 8% interest may be awarded on the compensation amount instead of 6%.
As against this, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurer inter alia contended that substantial amount has been awarded by the Tribunal, after due consideration of the oral, documentary and other evidence on record and is justified in fixing 25% contributory negligence on the part of the deceased by recording a finding of fact. Therefore, interference is not called for.
After careful consideration of the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and after perusal of the impugned judgment and award the point that would arise for consideration is:
Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?
The occurrence of the accident resulting in death of the deceased in the road traffic accident is not in dispute. Further, it is not in dispute that the claimants are none other than the wife and children of the deceased. It is also not in dispute that deceased was aged 65-70 years at the time of accident. On account of his untimely death, the financial condition of the family is affected and they have suffered pain and agony and lost the love and affection, inspiration and guidance. However, the Tribunal is justified in fixing the contributory negligence at 25% on the deceased after careful evaluation of the entire material on record and interference in the said finding of fact is not called for nor we find any substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants. Taking these relevant aspects into consideration, it is reasonable to re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 5,000/- per month to meet the ends of justice, out of which, if 1/4th towards personal expenses i.e., an amount of Rs. 1666/- is deducted since the claimants are five in number, the net income would be Rs. 3334/- per month. Since the deceased was aged 66-70 years, the appropriate multiplier would be 5. Accordingly, we re-determine the loss of dependency at Rs. 2,00,040/- (Rs. 3334/- x 12 x ''5'')-rounded off to 2,00,000/-. Accordingly, it is awarded.
Further, it is reasonable to award Rs. 45,000/- towards conventional heads like loss of consortium, loss of love and affection, loss of estate, transportation expenses etc., Thus in all, claimants would be entitled to Rs. 2,45,000/- as against Rs. 1,50,000/-, out of which, if 25% of the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased i.e., Rs. 61,250/- is deducted, the net amount comes to Rs. 1,83,750/- as against Rs. 1,50,000/- there would be enhancement of Rs. 33,750/-.
There is some substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants that the interest on the compensation amount should be awarded at 8% instead of 6%, in view of the ratio of the law laid down by the Apex Court and this Court in Catena of decisions, the entire compensation amount shall carry interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. In the light of the above facts and circumstances, appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 22.12.2011 passed in MVC No. 7891/2010 on the file of MACT-V, Court of Small Cases, Bangalore city is hereby modified awarding Rs. 33,750/- with 8% interest on the entire compensation from the date of petition till its realization.
The 2nd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with 8% interest p.a. from the date of petition till realization and also interest at 8% in respect of the entire compensation within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the judgment.
The enhanced compensation with interest at 8% shall be released in favour of appellant No. 1 immediately, on deposit by the 2nd respondent-Insurer.
Draw the award, accordingly.