K AMARNATH YADAV Vs. MANGAMMA MAHATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals, respectively by the claimants and the insurer are directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 22.12.2010 passed in MVC No.5778/2008 on the file of the IV Addl. Judge & Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore City, (SCCH -6), (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short).

(2.) BY its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.12,78,000/ - with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization as against the claim made by the claimants on account of the death of the deceased -G. Venkatarama in the road traffic accident. The claimants contend that the quantum of compensation awarded is inadequate and it requires enhancement. Whereas, it is the case of the insurer that, the quantum of compensation awarded is on the higher side as it is disproportionate to the income of the deceased, which is liable to be reduced reasonably. Also it is the contention of the insurance company that, the Tribunal has committed an error in not fixing reasonable contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. Accordingly, the claimants and insurer both felt necessitated to file these appeals, seeking appropriate reliefs as stated supra.

(3.) IN brief, the facts of the case are as under: Claimants are none other than the son and wife of the deceased and they have filed a claim petition under Section 166 of MV Act claiming compensation against the owner and the insurer of the Hyunday Car, on account of untimely death of the deceased in the road traffic accident which occurred on 19.04.2008 at about 7.40 a.m. on National Highway No.4 between TVS Scooty bearing No. KA -07/J -4152 ridden by the deceased and Hyundai Car bearing No. KA -02/MB -2561. It is the case of the claimants that the deceased was riding the scooty in moderate speed following traffic rules and regulations and while he was so riding between Kondarajanahalli Gate and Anjaneyaswamy temple on the outskirts of Kolar, at that time, a Hyundai Car came from opposite side with high speed, in a rash and negligent manner and collided against the TVS Scooty. Due to the impact the deceased sustained head injury and the pillion rider who is none other than his wife sustained multiple fractures. On the way to the hospital the deceased succumbed to the fatal injuries. Further, it is the case of the claimants that the deceased was aged about 50 years as on the date of accident and hale and healthy. He was earning lakhs of rupees per annum by doing agriculture, sericulture and horticulture. Also he was a proprietor of Suguna Paultry Farm. The claimants have produced Ex.P18 - five RTC extracts showing the number of lands held by the deceased to show that the deceased was a progressive agriculturist, Ex.P20 -Certificate and Ex.P15 -receipts issued by Suguna Farm and also Exs.P16 and P17 -TDS certificates and form No.16A issued by the concern, Exs.P13, P21, P19 and P14 to show that, he was also getting commission from APMC. It is further contended that the deceased was the only earning member in the family. Due to his untimely death, the 2nd claimant has lost her life partner at the young age and the 1st claimant has lost love and affection, inspiration and guidance in life and the social, moral and economic condition of the family is affected. Therefore, they were constrained to file a claim petition against the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle -Hyundai Car. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of Rs.12,78,000/ - under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Being dissatisfied with same, the claimants and insurer have presented these appeals seeking redressal of their grievances, as referred above.