The

present

appeal

is

filed

by

the

appellants/claimants challenging the judgment and award

dated 01.04.2017 in MVC.No.1773/2015 passed by the

Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Arasikere, for seeking

enhancement of compensation.

- 3 -

2. Brief facts of the case are that, on 06.12.2014

at about 12.00 noon while Manjunatha and Rajappa and

other passengers were travelling in a Maxi Cab bearing

Reg.No.KA.06/7098 to go to their respective villagers,

near karehalli-Bommanahalli road, the driver of Maxi cab

drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and

dashed against the goods Auto bearing Reg.No.KA.25/B-

2931 which was coming from opposite direction. As a

result of which, Manjunatha and Rajappa succumbed to

injuries.

Heard the arguments from both sides and

perused the records.

4.

The Tribunal has fastened the liability on the

owner of Maxi Cab bearing Reg.No.KA.06/7098 on the

ground that the driver was holding driving licence to drive

LMV (non-transport), but the offending vehicle Maxi Cab

bearing Reg.No.KA.06/7098 is the LMV transport vehicle.

Therefore, on this ground, there is no endorsement of

- 4 -

transport in the driving licence, hence the Tribunal has

fixed the liability on the owner of the vehicle.

5.

The question involved in the present case is no

more res integra in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble

Supreme Court in case of MUKUND DEWANGAN VS.

ORIENTAL

INSURANCE

COMPANY

LIMITED¹.

Therefore, the driver who is holding driving licence to drive

LMV (non-transport) is also competent to drive LMV

(transport). Therefore, on this ground, the Insurance

Company cannot be exonerated. Therefore, as per the

principle of law as above stated, the Insurance Company is

directed to pay compensation to the claimants by

indemnifying the owner of Maxi Cab.

6.

In the present case, the deceased was an

agriculturist and was aged 45 years and met with an

accident and succumbed to the injuries. The Tribunal has

1 AIR 2017 SC 3668

- 5 -

taken the income at Rs.7,000/- pm., which is on the lesser

side. The accident was caused in the year 2014, hence,

the notional income would be Rs.8,500/- per month as per

the Notional Income Chart recognized by the Karnataka

State Legal Service Authority and 25% of income is to be

added towards loss of future prospects in life as per the

judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of

1/3^rd of income has to be deducted towards his personal

and living expenses and remaining 2/3^rd would be

contribution towards the family. The deceased was aged

45 years, hence, the appropriate multiplier applicable is

‘14’. Therefore, loss of dependency is re-assessed and

quantified as follows:

Rs.8,500/- + Rs.2,125/- (25% of Rs.8,500/-)=Rs.10,625/-

Rs.10,625/- x 2/3 x 14 x 12=Rs.11,89,999/-

Accordingly, compensation of Rs.11,89,999/- which

is rounded off to Rs.11,90,000/- is awarded under the

head loss of dependency.

- 6 -

7.

The Tribunal has awarded compensation of

Rs.30,000/- towards loss of love and affection and

Rs.20,000/- towards loss of consortium. The loss of love

and affection and loss of consortium are having the same

connotation. As per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co.

Limited v. Nanu Ram & Others², each claimants are

entitled for Rs.40,000/-. Hence, in the present case, there

are

three

dependants.

Therefore,

compensation

of

Rs.1,32,000/-

(Rs.40,000/-

x

3

dependants

=

Rs.1,20,000/- + 10% escalation) with 10% escalation is

awarded under the head loss of consortium including loss

of love and affection.

8.

The compensation of Rs.16,500/- is awarded

under the head transportation of dead body and funeral

expenses as against Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

2 2018 ACJ 2782

- 7 -

9.

The compensation of Rs.16,500/- is awarded

under the head loss of estate as against Rs.20,000/-

awarded by the Tribunal.

10. Thus, in all, the appellant/claimant is entitled to

the compensation as follows:

1

Loss of dependency

Rs.

11,90,000/-

2

Lo