Court determined enhanced compensation for claimants in a fatal accident case, acknowledging the deceased's potential earnings and hardships faced by claimants.

JUDGMENT :

VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL, J.

This appeal is filed by the appellants-claimants being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Senior Civil Judge & AMACT, Bailhongal (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in M.V.C. No. 625/2017 dated 16.01.2021 seeking for enhancement of compensation.

2. Brief facts leading to the case are that on 31.07.2016 at about 8.00 p.m. Manjunath (deceased) was proceeding on motorcycle bearing No. KA-20-EB-5110 to go to his house at Bailhongal. When he reached near Bailvad Varti cross on Belagavi-Bailhongal road, motorcycle bearing No.KA-22-EL-4883 came from opposite side in high speed, rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of deceased. Due to the accident, Manjunath suffered fatal head injuries and died on the spot.

3. Claimants, who are the parents of the deceased, have filed claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.50 lakhs. It is averred in the claim petition that deceased was aged 24 years as on the date of accident, he was hale and healthy, doing technical work at Aditya Milk Dairy at Kurgund, earning Rs.15,000/- per month and contributing the entire amount for the maintenance of the family. Due to his untimely death the claimants are put to hardship. The accident had occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the offending motorcycle.

4. Respondent No.2-insurer in the objections denied the claim petition averments and contended that the accident as stated in the claim petition had not occurred but the deceased himself fell from the vehicle and caused accident. It further contended that riders of both the motorcycle were not having a valid driving licence.

5. Respondent No.2-owner of the offending vehicle that as on the date of accident the policy of insurance was in force and liability, if any, to pay compensation, is on the insurer.

6. The Tribunal on the basis of averments framed necessary issues. Mother of deceased got herself examined as PW1 and got marked documents as per Exs.P.1 to P.15 whereas no oral and documentary evidence is adduced on behalf of the respondents.

7. The Tribunal after hearing both parties and going through the oral and documentary evidence on record, allowed the claim petition in part with costs awarding a total compensation of Rs.12,79,600/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of claim petition till payment. Claimants being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation have preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

8. Sri Hanamant R. Latur, learned counsel appearing for the claimants-appellants submits that the Tribunal has committed grave error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.8,000/- per month. It is submitted that deceased had completed I.T.I. Diploma course in Electronic & Mechanical Branch, having potential to earn at least Rs.15,000/- per month. It is submitted that deceased had applied for the post of Driver in the Excise Department. In the said Department, he received a communication for driving test and if found eligible and appointed, he would have received salary of Rs.30,000/- per month. Hence, learned counsel seeks to assess monthly income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/-.

9. Learned counsel further submitted that the Tribunal ought to have awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- each to the claimants towards loss of consortium. Thus he prayed to allow the appeal.

10. Per contra, Sri Suresh S. Gundi, learned counsel for the insurer supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and contended that the Tribunal has recorded a clear finding that no legally acceptable evidence was placed on record to accept income of the deceased. In view of the same, the Tribunal has rightly assessed his inco