1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
M.F.A.NO.6083/2017 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SOWMYA
W/O LATE YOGISHA,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
2. MSTR. LOHITH
S/O LATE YOGISHA,
AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS,
SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS
MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN
SMT.SOUMYA i.e. THE APPELLANT NO.1
BOTH ARE RESIDENT OF
DASARAHALLI VILLAGE,
BAGURU HOBLI,
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 111
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. ABHIJEET S.K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DEPOT MANAGER
CHANNARAYAPATNA KSRTC BUS-DEPOT,
CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 116.
2
2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR BUS STAND,
BENGALURU-560 027.
3. SRI. THIMAPPA T.N.
S/O NEELAIAH,
AGE NOT KNOWN (MAJOR),
R/O THIRUMALAPURA VILLAGE,
H.N.PURA TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT-573 201
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. F.S.DABALI, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 AND R-2
NOTICE TO R-3 IS DISPENSED WITH V/C ORDER DATED
17.11.2022)
THIS M.F.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.04.2016
PASSED IN MVC NO.169/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDE, MACT, CHANNARAYAPATNA, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the claimants and the learned counsel appearing for the KSRTC.
2. This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 16.04.2016, passed in 3 M.V.C.No.169/2014 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Channarayapatna ('the Tribunal' for short).
3. The parties are referred to as per their original rankings before the Tribunal to avoid confusion and for the convenience of the Court.
4. The factual matrix of the case of the claimants before the Tribunal is that the husband of the claimant No.1 by name Sri. Yogisha was traveling from Gandasi Hand post to Honnakumaranahalli in KSRTC bus and the same was met with the accident. As a result, he sustained injuries and immediately he was shifted to Arsikere Government Hospital and then to NIMHANS, Bengaluru and subsequently, he succumbed to the injuries. The Tribunal after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record has awarded total compensation of Rs.9,70,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. Being aggrieved by the same, the claimants are before this Court challenging the quantum of compensation. 4
5. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing for the claimants before this Court is that the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.7,500/- per month. The accident was of the year 2013. The notional income would be Rs.8,000/- per month. Further, while calculating loss of dependency, the Tribunal has not considered future prospects and also the compensation awarded on the other heads is very meager and the same requires to be enhanced.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the KSRTC submits that with regard to income of the deceased is concerned, no document is placed on record. However, the Tribunal has taken the income at Rs.7,500/- per month, which is just and reasonable.
7. Having heard the respective counsel and also on perusal of the material placed on record, it is evident that the Tribunal while considering the issue No.2 has considered the income at Rs.7,500/- per month, however failed to consider the future prospects while calculating loss of dependency. Having considered the age of the deceased at 36 years, the future 5 prospects of 40% has to be added. Accident was of the year 2013. The notional income would be Rs.8,000/- per month. After adding 40% of future prospects, it comes to Rs.11,200/-. The claimants are wife and minor son. Hence, 1/3rd has to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. After deducting 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses and applying relevant multiplier of '15', the loss of dependency comes to Rs.13,44,060/- (7,467 x 12 x 15). There are two claimants and hence, they are entitled for Rs.40,000/- each on the head of loss of love and affection apart from Rs.33,000/- towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. In all, the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.14,57,060/- as against Rs.9,70,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
8. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) This appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal dated 16.04.2016, passed in
6
M.V.C.No.169/2014, is modified granting
compensation of Rs.14,57,060/- as against Rs.9,70,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till deposit.
(iii) However, the claimants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 381 days in filing the appeal.
(iv) The KSRTC is directed to pay the compensation amount with interest within six weeks from today.
(v) In all other respects, the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal remains undisturbed.
(vi) The Registry is directed to transmit the records to the concerned Tribunal, forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE PM