Though matter is listed for admission, with consent

of learned counsel for parties, it is taken-up for final

disposal.

Challenging

judgment

and

award

dated

12.10.2021 passed by I Additional Senior Civil Judge and

- 3 -

MACT-VI at Vijayapura, (for short 'Tribunal') in MVC

no.1770/2016, this appeal is filed.

Shri Bapugouda Siddappa, learned counsel for

appellants submitted that, appeal was by claimants

seeking for enhancement of compensation. It was

submitted that in a claim petition filed under Section

163(A) of Motor Vehicles Act, it was stated that on

13.08.2016, when Saleem was driving Eicher Tempo

bearing registration no.MH-16/Q-5089, towards Karamala,

it met with accident with Lorry bearing registration no.KA-

06/B-6583, near Rajayog Hotel, in which he sustained

grievous injuries and died during treatment.

It was submitted that despite service of notice,

respondent no.1-owner of vehicle did not appear and was

placed ex-parte. Respondent no.2-insurer filed objections

alleging that accident occurred due to self negligence of

deceased. Even violation of policy condition due to lack of

driving licence to drive vehicle was also urged.

- 4 -

Based on contentions, tribunal framed issues

and recorded evidence. On consideration, it held that in

accident between Eicher tempo and truck, deceased-

Saleem sustained fatal injuries and died. It held claimants

were entitled for compensation from insurer. Though

claimants had stated that annual income of deceased was

`40,000/- from business, tribunal considered it at `3,000/-

p.m., deducted 1/3^rd towards personal expenses, applied

multiplier of ‘17’ and awarded inadequate compensation of

`4,17,500/-. Therefore enhancement was sought.

6.

On other hand, Shri Sudarshan M., learned

counsel for respondent-insurer sought to support award.

7.

Heard learned counsel, perused impugned

judgment and award.

8.

Since appeal is by claimants seeking for

enhancement of compensation, point that would arise for

consideration is:

- 5 -

"Whether claimants are entitled for

enhancement of compensation as sought

for?"

9.

From above submissions, it is seen that there is

no dispute about occurrence of accident involving insured

vehicle leading to death of Saleem. It is also not in dispute

that insurer was held liable to compensation and no appeal

was preferred. But while assessing compensation, tribunal

considered income of deceased as `3,000/- per month

notionally.

10.

It is settled law that even in absence of specific

evidence regarding income, same could be assessed

notionally. Since claimants had stated that annual income

of deceased from business was `40,000/- per annum, and

same was within maximum income limit for claim under

Section 163(A), there was no justification for tribunal to

have considered less than said amount. Hence, `40,000/-

per annum has to be considered and compensation

required to be recomputed as follows:

- 6 -

`40,000/- X 1/3 X 17 = `4,53,333/-.

11.

In addition, claimant would be entitled for

`5,000/- towards consortium, `2,000/- towards funeral

expenses and `2,500/- towards loss of estate. Hence total

award will be `4,62,833/-. Point for consideration is

answered partly in affirmative as above.

Consequently, following

ORDER

Appeal is allowed in part. Claimants are held entitled

for enhanced compensation of `4,62,833/- with interest at

rate of 6 per annum from date of claim petition till deposit,

excluding for 394 days being delay in filing appeal.

Insurer is directed to deposit said amount within a

period of six weeks from date of receipt of certified copy of

this judgment.

On deposit, sum of `60,000/- is ordered to be

apportioned in favour of claimant no.1. Remaining amount

- 7 -

is ordered to be shared between claimants no.2 to 5

equally.

Entire

compensation

apportioned

in

favour

of

claimants no.1 and 2 is ordered to be released, while that

in favour of others ordered to be kept in fixed deposit for

period of four years or until they attain age of majority,

which