1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
MFA NO.770 OF 2018 (MV)
BETWEEN:
SMT. SHARADAMMA
W/O LATE GANGADHARAPPA
55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE
R/O DODDABOKIKERE VILLAGE
AND POST, TARIKERE TALUK
CHIKKAMAGALURU DIST-577 228
... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NAGARAJA R.C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. GANESH U. NAIK
S/O UPENDRA H. NAIK
37 YEARS, BADGE NO.675
YELLAPURA DEPOT
R/O URUKERE VILLAGE
KUMTA TALUK - 581 343
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
KSRTC, SHANTHINAGARA
BENGALURU - 560 027
3. R. G. PRASANNA
S/O LATE GANGADHARAPPA
37 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST
R/O AT DODDABOKIKERE
VILLAGE AND POST
2
TARIKERE TALUK
CHIKKAMAGALURU DIST - 577 228
4. B. G. RAJESH
S/O LATE GANGADHARAPPA
37 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST
R/AT DODDABOKIKERE
VILLAGE AND POST, TARIKERE TALUK
CHIKKAMAGALURU DIST - 577 228
5. D. G. GIRISHA
S/O LATE GANGADHARAPPA
AGED 32 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST
R/O DODDABOKIKERE
VILLAGE AND POST, TARIKERE TALUK
CHIKKAMAGALURU DIST - 577 228
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. F.S.DABALI, ADV. FOR R2;
R1 - NOTICE DISPENSED WITH;
R3, R4 & R5 ARE SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 19.08.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.339/2015 ON THE
FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MMACT, KADUR,
CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
M.I.ARUN J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 19.08.2017 passed in MVC No.339/2015 by the Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Kadur, Chikkamagalur District (for short 'the Tribunal'), petitioner no.1 therein has preferred this appeal.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 18.02.2015, the deceased Gangadharappa was riding his motorcycle bearing registration No.KA 18/J 4674 along with one Manjappa towards Doddabnokikeri village between Kadur and Berur. At that time, a KSRTC bus bearing registration No.KA 31/F 1327 being driven by respondent no.1 in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased, consequent to which, the deceased fell down, sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same.
4. Petitioner no.1 is the wife of the deceased Gangadharappa and petitioner nos.2 to 4 are his sons. Respondent no.1 is the driver of the bus and respondent 4 no.2 is the Corporation to which the offending bus belongs to.
5. After institution of the claim petition, notice was issued to the respondents. In response, respondent no.1 remained absent and respondent no.2 appeared through its counsel and filed objections denying the liability. To prove their case, the petitioners examined one witness and got marked Exs.P1 to P22. The respondents got examined one witness and got marked Exs.R1 & R2.
6. Based on the pleadings and the evidence let in, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident happened due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending bus and granted a compensation of Rs.4,17,000/- along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Not satisfied by the same, petitioner no.1-wife of the deceased has preferred this appeal.
7. The main contention of petitioner no.1 is that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. 5
8. Per contra, respondent no.2-KSRTC has justified the order of the Tribunal and sought for dismissal of the appeal.
9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
10. The factum of accident and negligence on the part of the driver of the offending bus not being in dispute, the only question that arises for consideration is the quantum of compensation.
11. The accident happened on 18.02.2015. At the time of the accident, the deceased was aged 58 years. Though the petitioners have claimed that he was earning an income of Rs.40,000/- per month, no evidence is adduced to support the claim. Under the said circumstances, notional income has to be adopted. The Tribunal has adopted a sum of Rs.6,000/- per month as notional income. We find the same to be on the lower side. The accident being of the year 2015, the notional income as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority in consultation with the Insurance Companies, we adopt a notional income of Rs.9,000/- per month. Petitioner no.1 is the wife of the 6 deceased and petitioner nos.2, 3 and 4 are grown up sons of the deceased and not dependents on him. Hence, 1/3rd of his income needs to be deducted towards his personal expenses. Further, the deceased being 58 years, 10% has to be added towards future prospects. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma v. D.T.C [(2009)6 SCC 121], a multiplier of 9 has to be taken into consideration. Thus, on the count of loss of dependency, the petitioners are entitled to a sum of Rs.7,12,800/- [Rs.9,000/- + 10% X 2/3rd X 12 X 9].
12. As per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Co.Ltd. v. Somwati [(2020)9 SCC 644], the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium.
13. In addition, the petitioners are entitled to a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. Thus, in all, the petitioners are entitled to a sum of Rs.7,82,800/-. However, it is admitted that the petitioners have received a sum of Rs.50,000/- as ex-gratia payment 7 from respondent no.2-Corporation. Thus, they are entitled to a sum of Rs.7,32,800/- as compensation.
14. Hence, the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part.
ii) The total compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is modified and enhanced to
Rs.7,32,800/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Thirty Two Thousand Eight Hundred only) as against Rs.4,17,000/- which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition till its realization.
iii) The portion of the order of the Tribunal inasmuch as liability and disbursement remains intact.
iv) The Corporation shall deposit the amount determined as aforesaid before the Tribunal within 90 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment and order. 8
v) The modified compensation amount shall be disbursed in terms of the order of the Tribunal.
vi) Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE hkh.