Age Of Accident Victim Crucial While Deciding About Compensation: Karnataka HC [Read Judgment]

Bench of Justice H.T.Narendra Prasad was hearing an appeal filed by the appellant Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award passed by the Court of Additional Senior Civil Judge & Additional MACT, Udupi in a motor vehicle claim.

Background

Ms. Jyothi, the accident victim, was travelling as a pillion rider on a motorcycle along with another person and when they reached near the Badhyaru Achin Cross on Venoor Guruvayanakere State Road, a tipper lorry came in a rash and negligent manner from Moodabidari and dashed against the motorcycle. As a result, Ms. Jyothi fell on the road and the said lorry ran over her and she died on way to the hospital. Parents of the deceased filed the claim petition before the Tribunal. After appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal granted compensation of Rs. 6, 96, 000 with interest at 6% per annum. Aggrieved by the same, insurance company filed appeal.

Contentions

Counsel for the Insurance Company submitted before the court that the Tribunal has erred in taking the multiplier based on the age of the deceased instead of age of the mother. It submitted further that the Tribunal is unjustified in adding 50% of the income of the deceased towards loss of the future prospects while calculating the loss of the dependency. Also he submitted that the compensation of Rs. 25,000 each awarded to the claimants in the category of "loss of love and affection" is on the higher side and prayed for the reduction of compensation.

On the other hand the counsel for the claimants submitted that as per the law laid down by the Supreme Court in National Insurance Company v. Pranay Sethi and Others, AIR 2017 SC, if deceased was having a permanent job and was below the age of 40 years, an addition of 50% of the established income should be made. He submitted further that the decision of top court also says that while calculating the "loss of dependency", the age of the deceased has to be taken into consideration and prayed for dismissal of appeal while seeing no error in finding of the Tribunal.

Decision

Court considering the decision of the apex court in the above-mentioned case accepted the contention of the counsel for the claimants adding further that multiplier has to be applied based on the age of the deceased and not that of mother of the deceased. It also referred to the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram reported in 2018, wherein it was held by the court that the claimants are entitled for compensation under the head "loss of love and affection".

Court rejected the contention of the counsel for the insurance company terming it as unjustified and dismissed the appeal.

The appellant company was represented by advocate H S Lingaraj and claimants by advocate Nataraj Ballal in the case.

Click here to download the judgment