:1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD Dated this the 25 th day of November 2011 Before THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.N.NAGAMOHAN DAS Miscellaneous First ADDeal No.3015/2010 (MV) BETWEEN: Marakka, W/ late Kengaiara Maraiah, Aged about 56 years, Rio. Manyakote, Challakere Tq., Chitradurga Dist. . . .Appellant (By Sri. Basavaraj M.Mekki, Advocate) AND: 1. Jyothemma, WIo late Dodda Suraiah, Aged about 29 years, 2. Mahesh, Sb late Dodda Suraiáh, Aged about 2 years, Respondent No.2 is minor and Rep. by natural guardian and Mother i.e., respondent No.1 herein. Both are Rio Kurihatti. Kudlige taluk. Bellary District. r :2: 3. Balarama Reddy. Sb R.A.Pulla Reddy. Aged about 40 years, Owner of lorry Regn. No.KA-16/8002. Rio No.95, Vidyanagara, Chitradurga. 4. MIs. Oriental Insu. Co.. Ltd.. By its Manager, By its Branch Qffice, Parvathi Nagar, Bellary. . ..Respondents (By Sri. M.K.Soudagar, Advocate for R4) (RI & R3 - served) This miscellaneous first appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act against the judgment and award dated 02.02.2010 in MVC No.108/2009 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & Member MACT-Vl, Kudligi, partly allowing the appeal for modify the judgment and award dated 2.2.10 by enhancing the compensation. This appeal coming on for admission this day, the court delivered the following: JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 2 February 2010 in M.V.C. No.108/2009 passed by the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) at Kudligi. 2. In a motor accident on 07.01.2009, the son of appellant by name Dodda Suraiah died. Appellant is the mother. l respondent is the wife and second respondent is the minor son of deceased. :3: 3. The main grievance of the appellant is the Tribunal committed a mistake in awarding less compensation under the head loss of dependency. On the date of accident, the deceased was aged about 35 years and the Tribunal had rightly applied 16 multiplier. The deceased has left behind three dependants and the Tribunal rightly deducted 1!3 income of the deceased towards personal expenses. On the date of accident, the deceased was an agriculturist. Respondent-claimants have produced Exs.R1 and R2-the RTC extracts to show that there was some land in the name of father and mother of the deceased. This evidence goes to show that the deceased was an agriculturist. The accident is of the year 2009. Therefore, a minimum of 450OI- per month is to be taken as income of the deceased. The Tribunal committed a mistake in taking monthly income of the deceased at 3,OOOI-. Therefore, the loss of dependency will be as under: Z3,000 x 12 x 16= ?5,76,000I-r 4 4. The Tribunal committed a mistake in awarding only a sum of ‘20.000/- under conventional heads, A minimum of ?35000/- is to be awarded. There is no grievance insofar as the compensation awarded under the head medical expenses’ at 1.42.000I-. Therefore, in all, the appellant is entitled for compensation of 753.000/-. 5. The Tribunal apportioned the compensation among the appeflant and respondent Nos,1 and 2. The Tribunal had awarded only 75,000I- to the appellant/mother. Having regard to enhancement of compensation, a sum of ‘1 .53,000/ is to be apportioned to the appellant. 6. For the reasons stated above, the following: ORDER i) The appeal is hereby allowed. ii) The impugned award dated 02.02.2010 in MVO No108/2009 passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) at Kudligi, is hereby modified enhancing the total compensation from 5,46,O00/ to 7,53.000/. iii) The appellant is entitled for an apportionment of 1,53.OOO!- and the remaining 6,OOOOO!- shall go to respondent Nos,1 and 2. Out of the amount apportioned to respondent Nos.1 and 2. a sum of 4.OO.OOOI- is to be kept in Fixed Deposit in the name of the 2 respondent, who is a minor, and the 1st respondent is entitled to draw the interest regularly. Ordered accordingly. Sd/ JUDGE Kms