The court recalibrated compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, reinforcing the consideration of income and future prospects in dependency claims.

CAV JUDGMENT

In M.F.A. No.6652/2013 and M.F.A. No.3409/2013

M.F.A. No.6652/2013 is filed by the claimants and M.F.A. No.3409/2013 is filed by insurance company against the judgment and award dated 08.01.2013 MACT-IV and III Additional District and Sessions Judge, D.K. Mangalore, In MVC No.348/2009.

2. One H. Vikram Bhat, met with an accident on 03.11.2008 and died subsequently. His mother and brother filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-. The Tribunal, considering the entire evidence on record, granted compensation of Rs.5,41,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization and respondent No.2 insurance company was directed to deposit the amount within two months from the date of the award.

3. Aggrieved by the said order, M.F.A. No.6652/2013 is filed seeking enhancement in which it is contended that Vikram Bhat was very intelligent, obtained Bachelor degree in Computer Applications from Sree Devi College of Information Science, affiliated to Mangalore University. After education in December 2007, there was an offer letter to him to work as Sales Development Manager in HDFC standard Life Insurance Company Ltd. located at Mangalore with a salary of Rs.2,00,000/- per annum. They filed salary certificate, but the Tribunal has considered his income as Rs.6,000/- per month, which is on lower side. The Tribunal also erred in calculating compensation under various heads, and interest is to be granted at the rate of 8% per annum instead of 6%.

4. The insurance company has filed M.F.A. No.3409/2013 contending that Tribunal without considering contributing negligence on the part of the driver of the car in which deceased was travelling gave finding that driver of the bus in question was on the extreme left side of the road as per Exhibit P6 sketch. It was open for vehicles plying in both directions as other portion of the road was blocked for the purpose of construction of a flyover at that stretch of road. The width of the road as per Exhibit P6 indicates that total width was 30 feet from the place of impact between two vehicles and there was clear 20 feet free space on the left side of the car, and it shows that the accident was due to the sole negligence of Vikram Bhat as there was no obstruction for clear visibility at 07.30 a.m. Head Constable who gave complaint was not an eyewitness, and he went to the spot only after receiving information. The reasoning of the Tribunal to hold that the bus driver alone was negligent based on the police investigation reports, was not proved by examining the concerned Investigating Officer, and it is not proper and correct. Tribunal has granted Rs. 5,14,800/- under head of loss of dependency, by taking the income of the deceased as Rs.6,000/- per month and adding 30% towards future prospect and deducting 50% towards self expenses and taking the multiplier of his mother as 11. Vikram Bhat was aged 25 years and he would have married in near future and have contributed more and thus, one third is to be deducted, as other elder brother, aged 29 years, would also contribute to the welfare of the mother of deceased and thus, requested for setting aside the award of the Tribunal.

5. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for both sides.

6. These appeals arise out of the same accident occurred on 03.11.2008 within the limits of Panambur Police Station, Mangaluru, in which United India Insuranc