The main legal point established in the judgment is that compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 is for accidental injury or death and not for other forms of death, and it should be determined based on the nature of the injuries and their nexus to the death.

N. Ananda, J.-This is a claimants' appeal for enhancement of compensation.

2. I have heard learned counsel for parties.

3. The I-claimant is the wife of late Virupakshaiah and other claimants are the daughters and son of late Virupakshaiah, who met with a motor vehicle accident that took place on 14.09.2006. As a result of accident, deceased had suffered following injuries:-

(I) Lacerated wound on medial part of right foot measuring 20 cms × 10 cms with acute bleeding.

(II) Fracture of calcanium bone.

Even after prolonged treatment, his condition did not improve. The right foot was completely swollen. The injury on right foot was infected. The deceased became disgusted due to deteriorated condition of his right foot. He committed suicide on 14.04.2007. The Tribunal has awarded global compensation of Rs. 35,000/-.

4. The learned counsel for claimants, has relied on judgment of Kerala High Court, reported in AIR 2009 Ker. 86 in the case of Venugopal Narayanan Nair and Others vs. T.L. Paulson and others wherein it is held "whether by 'accident'-motor accident victim committing suicide due to depression-Medical evidence indicating that depression arose consequent to head injuries sustained in accident-Thus death was caused due to accident-Legal representatives of deceased entitled to claim compensation."

5. The learned counsel for KSRTC has relied on a decision, reported in AIR 1998 SC 3191, in the case of Mrs. Helen C. Rebello and others vs. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpn. and another, wherein the Supreme Court has held:-

"So far as the general principle of estimating damages under the common law is concerned, it is settled that the pecuniary loss can be ascertained only by balancing on one hand, the loss to the claimant of the future pecuniary benefits that would have accrued to him but for the death with the 'pecuniary advantage which from whatever source comes to him by reason of the death. In other words, it is the balancing of loss and gain of the claimant occasioned by the death. But this has to change its colour to the extent a statute intends to do. Thus, this has to be interpreted in the light of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. It is very clear, to which there could be no doubt that this Act delivers compensation to the claimant only on account of accidental injury or death, not on account of any other death. Thus, the pecuniary advantage accruing under this Act has to be deciphered, correlating with the accidental death. The compensation payable under the Motor Vehicles Act is on account of the pecuniary loss to the claimant by accidental injury or death and not other forms of death. If there is natural death or death by suicide, serious illness, including even death by accident., through train, air flight not involving motor vehicle. would not be covered under the Motor Vehicles Act. Thus. the application of general principle under the common law of loss and gain for the computation of compensation under this Act must co-relate to this type of injury or deaths, viz, accidental. If the words "pecuniary advantage' from whatever source are to be interpreted to mean any form of death under this Act it would dilute all possible benefits conferred on the claimant and would be contrary of the spirit of the law. If the 'pecuniary advantage' resulting from death means pecuniary advantage coming under all forms of death then it will include all the assets movable, immovable, shares, bank accounts, case and every amount receivable under any contract. In other words, all heritable assets including what is willed by the deceased etc. This would obliterate both, all possible conferment of economic security to the claimant by the deceased and the intentions of the legislature. By such an interpretation the tortfeasor in spite of his wrongful act or negligence, which contributes to the death, would have in many cases no liability or meagre liability. Therefore the general principle of loss and gain takes colour