AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil
This appeal by the appellant-Insurer is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 02/05/2012 passed in MVC No. 542/2011 by the Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karkala, (for short Tribunal''), for reduction of compensation, on the ground that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on higher side. The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,34,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation, as against the claim of the claimants for a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased Sri. Thomas in the road traffic accident
In brief, the facts of the case are:
The claimant Nos. 1 and 2 are the parents of the deceased Sri. Thomas. They filed a claim petition before the Tribunal u/s 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation of Rs. 15,00,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased in the road traffic accident contending that, on 17.4.2010 at 3.00 p.m. when the deceased was travelling as a pillion rider in a motor cycle bearing reg. No. KA. 20.R.4290 on Bailoor Palli road, due to rash and negligent driving by the rider of the motor cycle, it fell over the black topped road, and he sustained grievous head injury and succumbed to the same on 18.4.2010. It is the further case of the claimants that, deceased was aged about 19 years, hale and healthy, working in rubber estate of Jerlad Barboza as rubber tapping worker and earning Rs. 15,000/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family and due to his untimely death they suffered lot. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, has allowed the claim petition in part, awarding the compensation of Rs. 5,34,000/-under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realisation.
Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the Insurer has presented this appeal, for reduction of compensation.
I have heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant.
The principal submission canvassed by the Learned Counsel for Insurer-Sri. O. Mahesh, at the out set is that, the Tribunal has erred in taking the loss of dependency due to the death of the deceased at Rs. 3,000/- per month without holding what was his income and how much was deducted towards his personal expenses since he was a bachelor. Further, he submit that 50% is to be deducted towards his personal expenses and that the claimants have not produced any documents to prove his age. Therefore, he submitted that, the amount awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of dependency is on higher side and is liable to be modified. After hearing the Learned Counsel for Insurer and after careful perusal of the material available on record at threadbare, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, it emerges that, the Tribunal after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and relying on the judgment passed by this Court report in ILR 2011 Karnataka 3168 (Moula Sab and others Vs. The Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited and another) is justified in assessing the loss of dependency at Rs. 3,000/- per month, since it is the case of the claimants that deceased was doing rubber tapping work and drawing the salary of Rs. 15,000/- per month and in adopting the Multiplier of ''14'' taking the age of the younger parent- mother, has awarded a sura of Rs. 5,04,000/- towards loss of dependency. Further, the Tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs. 30,000/- towards conventional heads i.e. towards loss of love and affection, loss of estate and towards funeral and obsequies and transportation of dead body. The said compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and hence, interference by this Court is not called for. Nor I find any justification or good grounds as such made out by the appellant to entertain the relief sought in this appeal. Hence, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed as devoid of merits.
The amount deposited by the Insurer shall be transferred to the jurisdictional Tribunal immediately.
Ordered accordingly.