The court reaffirmed that evidence of actual losses and circumstances surrounding accidents are critical in determining compensation amounts, overriding insurer's claims of foul play without substantive support.

JUDGMENT :

UMESH M ADIGA, J.

Both these appeals arises out of the judgment and award dated 26.12.2019 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Belur, in MVC.No.76/2017.

2. MFA.No.4181/2020 is filed by the insurer challenging its liability and quantum of compensation and MFA.No.3948/2021 is filed by the claimants for enhancement of compensation. Since both the appeals arises out of common judgment and award, both are taken up together for final disposal.

3. These matters are slated for orders but with the consent of both the parties, the matters are taken up together for final disposal.

4. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

5. The case of the claimants are that one Yashodara was son of claimant Nos.1 and 2 and brother of claimant Nos.3 and 4, met with an accident on 21.10.2015 due to rash and negligent riding of the motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-46-J-3818. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries and while undergoing treatment, he succumbed to injuries on 31.10.2015. It is the further case of the claimant that deceased was aged about 30 years. He was an agriculturist and was earning Rs.30,000/- per month. The claimants were dependent upon his earnings. With these reasons, prayed to award compensation.

6. The respondent No.3 - insurer denied the petition averments and denied its liability to pay the compensation and it has stated that the said vehicle was falsely implicated in this case, just to claim compensation and prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

7. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues.

8. Fact of the accident and death of Yashodara are not seriously disputed. There is no need to reconsider the same.

9. The Tribunal has recorded the evidence of both the parties and after hearing the arguments held that accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding of the motor cycle by its rider. The Tribunal assessed the age of the deceased as 30 years, applied the multiplier as '17', his income as Rs.7,000/- per month, deducted 50% of his income towards personal expenses. Since he was not married. On the basis of the same, following amount of compensation is awarded:

Dissatisfied with the quantum of amount awarded by the Tribunal, claimants have preferred MFA.No.3948/2021.

10. The learned counsel for the appellant - claimant contend that the Tribunal has not considered the income properly. The amount of compensation awarded under the other heads are on lower side. Therefore, prayed to enhance the same.

11. The learned counsel for insurer strenuously contends that the offending vehicle was falsely implicated in this case and it was not involved in the accident. The alleged incident occurred on 21.10.2015 but no case was registered till 24.10.2015. The deceased was said to have taken treatment at Hassan Government Hospital, but there is no record to substantiate the same. There was no justifiable reason in filing the complaint after five days. He further contended that the amount of compensation awarded under the head love and affection is on the higher side. The Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 9% per annum instead of 6% per annum, which is also on the higher side. With these reasons, prayed to set aside the impugned judgment.

12. The claimant on her behalf examined PW-1. In her evidence, she has reiterated the petition averments. Admittedly, she was not an eye witness to the incident. Relevant documents were marked on behalf of claimants. Ex.P1 reveals that first information was given to the police station on 25.10.2015 and accident occurred on 21