MAHADEVI Vs. N. NAGENDRAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE case of the claimants is that on 08.09.2010, at about 7.15 p.m., at Doddakoppalu Gate on Mysore -Hassan Road, when the deceased was going on his two wheeler bearing registration No. KA -45 -H -6703, the driver of the Maruthi car bearing registration No. KA -19 -MA -6064, came and dashed against him. He fell down and sustained grievous injuries. He was shifted to K.R. Nagar Government Hospital, and thereafter to B.G.S. Apollo Hospital, Mysore. He was treated as an inpatient for 7 days. Thereafter he was shifted to K.R. Nagar Government Hospital, wherein he died on 14.09.2010. He was a practicing Advocate for more than a decade and was earning Rs. 10,000/ - per month. Further, he had agricultural lands measuring 3 1/2 acres and earning almost Rs. 50,000/ - per annum. He was aged 43 years as on the date of the accident. His wife, children and parents filed a claim petition under Section -166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 8,74,500/ - along with interest. Seeking enhancement of the compensation, the claimants have filed this appeal.

(2.) THE deceased was a practicing Lawyer with more than 10 years of practice. The claimants claimed that he was earning Rs. 10,000/ - per month. We do not find any reason to disbelieve the same. A Lawyer who has put in 10 years of practice could be reasonably expected to earn that amount. Therefore, the Tribunal was very meager in considering his earning at Rs. 6,000/ - per month. He was aged 43 years. The legal profession being a growing profession, it is appropriate to grant 30% towards future prospects in view of the fact that he was a young and upcoming lawyer. Hence, his notional income is assessed as follows:

(3.) SINCE there were 5 dependents, 1/4th requires to be deducted towards his personal expenses and as he was aged 43 years, the appropriate multiplier would be '14'. Hence, the total loss of dependency is worked out as follows: