Compensation for wrongful death must be just and reasonable, based on documented evidence, and interest awarded should not exceed statutory limitations.

JUDGMENT :

VENKATESH NAIK T, J.

Heard learned counsel for the appellants/Cross objectors and learned counsel for respondents.

MFA No.485/2021 is filed by the Karnataka State Road Corporation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 26.02.2020 passed in MVC No.208/2015 on the file of II Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kodagu-Madikeri, Virajpet (for short, 'Tribunal'), on the ground of quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, whereas MFA.Crob.No.121/2021 is filed by the Cross objectors/claimants, seeking enhancement of compensation, whereby, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.17,60,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings in the claim petition before the Tribunal.

3. Brief facts of the claimants' case before the Tribunal is as under:-

On 20.04.2015 at about 9.15 p.m., one K.C. Sunil Kumar alongwith his friend M.A. Dasthagiri was proceeding towards Virajpet from Bittangala as pillion rider in motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-12/J-2926 and when they reached near Yajna Tower and Restaurant, a KSRTC bus bearing registration No.KA-10/F-0088 driven by its driver came in rash and negligent manner from Gonikoppal and hit the motorcycle of Sunil Kumar, consequent upon which, Sunil Kumar and his friend Dasthagiri sustained injuries and immediately they were shifted to Mysore and later to Tallicherry Co- operative Hospital, Kerala, wherein Sunil Kumar took treatment for seven days and succumbed to the injuries on 07.05.2015. Hence, the claimants filed a claim petition under section 166 of M.V. Act. Claimant No.1 is the daughter, claimant No.2 is the son and claimant No.3 is the wife of deceased K.C. Sunil Kumar.

4. Learned counsel Smt. Renuka H.R., appearing for the Corporation-Appellant in MFA No.485/2021 vehemently contended that the Tribunal assessed the compensation by determining the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- p.m. without any basis. As per the case of the claimants, deceased was running a hotel by name Akshatha Hotel and the documents produced in respect of occupation of the deceased is the notarized copy of the licence, which was valid from 01.04.2012 till 31.03.2013. Hence, no documents were produced to prove that Akshatha Hotel was being run by the deceased as on the date of the accident i.e., in the year 2015. Further, the Tribunal has granted an exorbitant compensation under conventional heads and the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 9% p.a., which is excessive and erroneous and the same needs to be reduced to 6% p.a., On all these grounds, learned counsel prayed to allow the appeal.

5. Learned counsel Sri. Mohana Chandra P, appearing for the Cross objectors-claimants in MFA.Crob.No.121/2021 vehemently contended that the Tribunal awarded meager compensation of Rs.1.00 lakh towards 'loss of love and affection' which is against the principles laid down in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 and Magma General Insurance Company Ltd., vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130 . Further, the Tribunal has not awarded fair compensation towards 'loss of consortium'. The Tribunal has also not awarded compensation for the medical expenses vide Ex-P10. Further, the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head 'future prospects', since the deceased was below the age of 50 years at the time of the accident. Hence, learned counsel prayed to allow the cross objection appeal.

6. We have perused the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The following points would arise for our consideration in these appeals:-

"Whe