1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

MFA NO.200953/2016 (MV)

BETWEEN:

1.

Sri Chandrakant

S/o Ashok Gaddam

Age: 37 Years, Occ: Coolie

2.

Nitin S/o Chandrakant Gaddam

Age: 15 Years, Occ: Student

3.

Akash S/o Chandrakant Gaddam

Age: 12 Years, Occ: Student

(Appellants No.2 and 3 are minors

R/by their natural father appellant No.1)

All R/o Gandhi Nagar, Jopadpatti No.4

Akkalkot Road, Solapur – 413 001

... Appellants

(By Sri Basavaraj R. Math, Advocate)

AND:

1.

Laxminarayan S/o Venkatrao Gorantala

Age: 49 Years, Occ: Private Service

At/Post: 102/D-37 Bhavani Peth

Solapur – 413 001

(Owner of Tavera vehicle No.MH-13/AC-3456)

2

2.

The Branch Manager

New India Assurance Company Ltd.

S.S. Front Road, Bijapur – 586 101

3.

Mr. H. Siddesh S/o Hanumantappa

Hondada Road, Opp: Beereshwar Temple

Davanagere – 577 001

4.

The Branch Manager

ICICI Lombard Gen. Insurance Co. Ltd.

Opposite Polytechnic Eng. College

Bijapur Bagalkot Road

Bijapur – 586 101

... Respondents

(Sri. C.S. Kalburgi, Advocate for R4;

Sri. Manvendra Reddy, Advocate for R2;

Notice to R1 and R3 dispensed with)

This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under

Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, praying to modify

the impugned judgment and award dated 17.06.2015

passed by the MACT No.VI, Vijayapur in MVC

No.1539/2012.

This appeal coming on for admission, this day, the

Court delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

Learned counsel Sri. Manvendra Reddy accepts

notice for respondent No.2 and he is permitted to file

vakalat within two weeks.

3

2.

The claimants-appellants are before this

Court

in

this

appeal

seeking

enhancement

of

compensation granted under the judgment and award

dated 17.06.2015 in MVC No.1539/2012 passed by the

MACT No.VI, Vijayapur.

3.

The claimants are husband and children of

deceased. It is submitted that the deceased was working

as coolie in Bidi Factory and earning a sum of

Rs.8,000/- per month as salary. The Tribunal on

consideration of the material on record both oral and

documentary evidence, granted total compensation of

Rs.6,52,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% per

annum.

4.

The learned counsel for the appellants

submits that the Tribunal erred in taking notional

income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- and submits that

the Tribunal ought to have taken Rs.6,500/- as notional

4

income of the deceased in the absence of any material to

indicate the exact income.

5.

Per

contra,

learned

counsel

for

the

respondents No. 2 and 4-Insurance companies submits

that the compensation granted by the Tribunal is just

and proper and needs no interference by this Court with

the judgment and award.

6.

There is no dispute with regard to the

accident and the liability fixed by the Tribunal. The

accident is of the year 2012. The claimants claim that

the deceased was earning Rs.8,000/- per month. No

document whatsoever is produced to substantiate their

claim. In the absence of material, the notional income

is to be determined to calculate the compensation. This

Court and the Lok Adalaths while determining the

compensation in respect of motor accident claims of the

year 2012 would take Rs.6,500/- per month as notional

income. In the case on hand also, in the absence of the

5

material to indicate the exact income of the deceased, it

would be appropriate to take Rs.6,500/- per month as

notional income of the deceased.

7.

Thus, the appellants/claimants would be

entitled for the following modified compensation:-

Towards loss of dependency:

Rs.6500/-

less

1/3^rd

=

Rs.4,334x12x17

=

Rs.8,84,136/-

8.

Further, the claimants would be entitled for

Rs.70,000/-

on

conventional

heads

instead

of

Rs.40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

9.

Thus, the appellants/claimants would be

entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.3,02,136/-

(Rs.9,54,136/- less Rs.6,52,000/- as awarded by the

Tribunal) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum

from the date of claim petition till r