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 10.6.2011 passed in MVC No. 2292/2010 on the file of the III Addl. Sr. Civil Judge and MACT at Bangalore (SCCH-18).
The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,07,000/- with interest at 8% from the date of petition till its realization, on account of the death of deceased Basavaraju in the road traffic accident. The claimants on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and it requires enhancement, have presented this appeal.
The brief facts of the case on hand are, appellant nos. 1 and 2 are the parents of the deceased Basavaraju. They have filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the MV Act claiming compensation on account of the untimely death of the deceased in the road traffic accident that occurred on 20.1.2010 at about 11.15 p.m. When the deceased was proceeding as a pillion rider on a motorcycle bearing registration No. KA-04-EZ-440 and the rider of the motorcycle was riding the same carefully and cautiously observing traffic rules, when they reached near Heruru village, Kasaba Hobli, Gubbi taluk on N.H. 206, at that time, the driver of the Eicher goods vehicle bearing registration No. KA 35 A 1706 came from opposite direction in a high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him, due to the impact, they fell down and sustained multiple grievous injuries all over the body. Immediately, he was shifted to Government General Hospital, Tumkur for first aid treatment and subsequently to Harsha Hospital, Nelamangala for further treatment and undergone treatment as inpatient from 20.1.2010 to 27.1.2010 and thereafter, he was shifted to KIMS Hospital, Bangalore where he was treated as an inpatient from 28.1.2010 till his death on 2.2.2010. Deceased was hale and healthy prior to the accident and was aged about 28 years. He had completed ITI training and was working as a lecturer. Due to his death, the parents are deprived of seeing his future and also security. They have suffered pain and agony and his death has also affected the social and financial condition of the family and there is a financial distress on account of the untimely death. The matter had come up before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing both sides and after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, after taking the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month and after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses and by applying the appropriate multiplier of 14 has awarded a total compensation of Rs. 4,07,000/- including an amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- towards medical expenses. Being dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed, the appellants/claimants have filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants Sri N.S. Bhat at the outset that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month, which is on the lower side. The claimants are the parents of the deceased. They have lost the security and are deprived of seeing the bright future of their son and due to his untimely death in the road traffic accident. In spite of giving necessary medication in three hospitals, they could not save him. They have spent reasonable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. He was aged about 28 years at the time of accident. Having regard to the age, avocation and year of accident, the income of the deceased is liable to be reassessed reasonably out of which, 50% is to be deducted towards personal expenses and taking the age of the younger parent of the deceased appropriate multiplier be adopted and reasonable compensation be awarded towards loss of dependency by modifying the''. impugned judgment and award. It is further submitted since the deceased was admitted in three hospitals, the Tribunal ought to have awarded reasonable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges.
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 also by considering the age of the deceased, his avocation and date of the accident. 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 parents of the deceased. It is also not in dispute that deceased was aged 28 years and an ITI holder, doing Lecturer job. However, no credible documents are produced nor examined the Principal of the College except making oral statements. Taking these relevant aspects into consideration, it is reasonable to assess the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month to meet the ends of justice, out of which, 50% is to be deducted towards personal expenses, since he was unmarried. If 50% is deducted, the remaining net income would be Rs. 3,000/- p.m. Taking into consideration the age of the younger parent, i.e., 45 years, the appropriate multiplier would be 14. Accordingly, we re-determine the loss of dependency to Rs. 5,04,000/- (Rs. 3000 x 12 x ''14''). Accordingly, it is awarded.
Further, it is reasonable to award Rs. 45,000/- towards conventional heads like loss of love and affection, loss of estate, and transportation expenses. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 1,20,000/- towards medical expenses. However, no compensation is awarded towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges during the period of treatment. It is not in dispute that deceased was in hospital for 10 days and taken treatment in three different hospitals during which period, the claimants and might have spent reasonable amount. Hence, Rs. 1,50,000/- is awarded towards medical expenses including incidental expenses, as against 1,20,000/-. Thus in all, claimants would be entitled to Rs. 6,99,000/- as against Rs. 4,07,000/- i.e., there would be enhancement of Rs. 2,92,000/- with interest at 8% p.a. on the enhanced amount of compensation, 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 10.6.2011 passed in MVC No. 2292/2010 on the file of III Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Bangalore is hereby modified awarding an additional compensation of Rs. 2,92,000/- with 8% interest on the enhanced amount compensation, from the date of petition till its realization.
The 2nd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the judgment.
Out of the compensation amount, Rs. 1,50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of the appellant No. 2 for a period of 10 years renewable for another 10 years in any of the nationalized or scheduled bank and she is entitled to withdraw the interest periodically.
Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of the appellant No. 1 for a period of 10 years and renewable for 5 years, he is entitled to withdraw the interest periodically.
Remaining Rs. 42,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of appellants No. 1 and 2 in equal proportion immediately, after deposit by the 2nd respondent-Insurer.
Draw the award, accordingly.