SMT. MANGALA Vs. K.P. MAHESH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/claimant presented the claim petition in MVC No. 488/2012 on the file of the Fast Track Court and Addl. MACT, Dharwad (for short 'Tribunal') which is allowed by the Tribunal by its judgment and award dated 12.03.2015 awarding a total compensation of Rs. 4,57,000/- along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of the petition. The appellant/claimant, who is the mother of the deceased who succumbed to the injuries suffered by her in a road accident while she was riding on the pillion of a two wheeler, and the 7th respondent (the husband of the deceased) are held to be entitled jointly for the compensation awarded and the interest.

(2.) The Claimant, in support of the claim for compensation, could establish that the deceased was working as a Computer Operator with M/s. Vodafone in Bangalore prior to her marriage to the 7th respondent, but she was later working with Jubilant Organization situated in Industrial Area, Nanjangudu. The Tribunal considering this evidence took the notional income of the deceased @ Rs. 8,000/- per month. However, insofar as the compensation, the Tribunal, because the deceased was claimant's married daughter, concluded that the claimant will be entitled for compensation only towards loss of estate. Further, the Tribunal to compute the loss of estate, as against the loss of dependency, deducted ¾th of the income of Rs. 8,000/- (it is noted that the Tribunal has wrongly mentioned the income as Rs. 5,000/- but while taking ¼th has taken ¼th of Rs. 8,000/-) and applied the multiplier of '18' based on the age of the deceased. Thus, the Tribunal arrived at the sum of Rs. 4,32,000/- (8,000 x 25% = 2000 x 12 x 18) as loss of estate; the Tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards transportation of the dead body, funeral expenses and other incidental expenses.

(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal could not have deducted ¾th of the income solely because the deceased was the claimant's married daughter, and in view of the evidence on record that the claimant and her younger daughter (a student as on the date of the accident) were depending on the income of the deceased, the Tribunal ought to have deducted only towards the personal expenses. Further, the learned counsel for the appellant also contended that the Tribunal ought to have taken the income of the deceased at Rs. 8000/- instead of Rs. 5000/-.