LAWS(KAR)-2012-8-442

H.S. SAMPATH KUMAR, S/O. LATE H.S. SRINIVASAN AND H.S. SOWBHAGYALAKSHMI Vs. R. BALASUBRAMANI, MAJOR, S/O. K. RAMACHANDRAN, NO. 12/1, D. NO. 14, 4TH MAIN, LINK ROAD, NEAR AYYAPPA TEMPLE, MADIWALA, BANGALORE AND THE REGIONAL MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA

Decided On August 01, 2012
H.S. Sampath Kumar, S/O. Late H.S. Srinivasan And H.S. Sowbhagyalakshmi Appellant
V/S
R. Balasubramani, Major, S/O. K. Ramachandran, No. 12/1, D. No. 14, 4Th Main, Link Road, Near Ayyappa Temple, Madiwala, Bangalore And The Regional Manager, The New India Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the claimants is directed against the judgmemt and award dated 19* February 2007, passed in MVC No. 8442/2005, by the 14th Additional Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore City (SCCH -10), (for short, 'Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 4,99,000/ - awarded in favour of the claimants as against their claim for Rs. 20,00,000/ -, is inadequate. The facts in brief are that, the claimants are the parents of the deceased B.S. Vivek. They filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, contending that, at about 6:45 A.M, on 16 -01 -2005, when the deceased was riding his motor cycle bearing Registration No. KA -05/EW -762, on Bangalore -Hosur Road, near Yedavanahalli check Post, he met with an accident on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of Lorry bearing Registration No. HR -38/4124. Due to the impact, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same.

(2.) IT is the case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 22 years and working as Technician in Asia Tobacco company, earning a sum of Rs. 10,000/ - per month and was hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of the untimely death of the deceased, the appellants have lost the love and affection apart from social and financial security and therefore, they have to be compensated reasonably.

(3.) WE have gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and heard the learned counsel appearing for appellants and also the Insurer, for quite some time.