MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5501 OF 2025 (MV-D)

Digitally signed by SHIMOGGA DISTRICT-577 201 PADMASH REE SHEKHAR AND DESAI AYANURU HARNALLI ROAD, Location: High SHIMOVAMOGGA TALUK Court of AND SHIMVOAGGA DIST. Karnataka

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.09.04.2025 PASSED IN MVC NO.126/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT-I, SHIVAMOGGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 09.04.2025 passed in MVC No.126/2022 on the file of the I Additional District Judge and Additional Mact-I, Shivamogga, for enhancing the compensation.

2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 remained absent. The ranks of the parties are retained as per tribunal for the sake of convenience.

3. Venugopal minor child aged 9 years met with an accident on 24.11.2021 and died subsequently, his mother as a natural guardian filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.61,10,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.2,75,000/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.

4. Aggrieved by the said award, she preferred an appeal and mainly contended that the petitioner was aged 9 years at the time of the accident and studying third standard, he was their only son. But the Tribunal granted meager compensation by considering his notional income as Rs.30,000/- p.a., and reasonable amounts are not granted under other heads and thus requested for enhancement of the compensation. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the citation reported in (2014) SCC 396 in case of Hitesh Nagjibhai Patel Vs Bababhai Nagjibhai Rabari and Anr, in which it was held that the Tribunal has to consider the minimum wages of the particular year in order to arriving for calculation of the compensation. For the same proportion learned counsel for the appellant relied upon another citation reported in (2020) 4 SCC 413 in case of Karuna Parmar Vs Prakash Sinha & Ors. He also filed chart of minimum wages for the year 2021- 2022, if we consider the income of the skilled worker for the relevant year, it comes to Rs.15076 (highly skilled) and the relevant multiplier to be taken as 15. He is also entitled for 40% towards future prospects and 50% is deducted towards expenses. Hence, loss of dependency comes to Rs.15,076 + 40% x 12 x 15 - 50%= Rs.18,99,576/-. The petitioner No.1 is mother of the deceased and she is entitled for an amount of Rs.44,000/- towards filial consortium and also Rs.33,000/- under the conventional heads.

5. Thus in all, components awarded by this court are as below,

Sl.Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1	Towards loss of dependency	18,99,576
2	Towards loss of consortium	44,000
3	Conventional heads	33,000
	Total	19,76,576

Hence, the compensation granted by tribunal is enhanced from Rs.2,75,000/- to Rs.19,76,576/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

6. In the result, the following order is passed:

ORDER

i. Appeal is allowed in part.

ii. The judgment and award dated 09.04.2025 passed in MVC No.126/2022 on the file of the I Additional District Judge and Additional Mact-I, Shivamogga, is modified.

iii. The claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.19,76,576/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.2,75,000/- granted by the tribunal.

iv. Respondent/Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded amount before the tribunal. Therefore, respondent/Insura

Click Here to Read the rest of this document