Gowramma vs M/S Tran System Logistics
2021 Latest Caselaw 513 Kant

                             1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021

                          BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

                MFA No.3849 OF 2013(MV)
                          C/W
                MFA No.3850 OF 2013(MV)

IN MFA 3849/2013
BETWEEN:

Gowramma,
48 years,
W/o Late. Yajamana @ Dosappa,
R/at No.22/2,6th Main,1st Cross,
Agrahara Dasarahalli,
Bangalore-560 079.                       ... Appellant

(By Sri. R.Chandrashekar, Advocate)

AND:

1.     M/s. Tran System Logistics,
       International Limited,
       No.20, Toyota Techno Park,
       Bidadi Industrial Area,
       Ramanagaram Taluk & District.

2.     The Manager,
       New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
       DU-3(6703000), No.9,
       Mahalakshmi Chambers,
       2nd Floor, M.G. Road,
       Bangalore-560 001.            ... Respondents
                             2



(By Sri.R.Jayaprakash, Advocate for R2:
Notice to R1 is dispensed with)

      This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act,
against the Judgment and Award dated:26.05.2012
passed in MVC No.4905/2010 on the file of the XVII Addl.
Judge, Court of Small Causes, MACT, Mayohall Unit,
Bangalore, partly allowing the claim petition for
compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.

IN MFA 3850/2013
BETWEEN

Mahesh, 29 years
S/o Late. Yajamana @ Dasappa,
R/at No.16, 4th Cross,
Industrial Town,
A.D.Halli, Bangalore.                     ...Appellant

(By Sri.Chandrashekar, Advocate)

AND

1.    M/s. Tran System Logistics,
      International Limited,
      No.20, Toyota Techno Park,
      Bidadi Industrial Area,
      Ramanagaram Taluk & District-571511.

2.    The Manager,
      New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
      DU-3(6703000), No.9,
      Mahalakshmi Chambers,
      2nd Floor, M.G. Road,
      Bangalore-560 001.              ... Respondents

(By Sri.R.Jayaprakash, Advocate for R2:
Notice to R1 is dispensed with)
                            3



      This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act,
against the Judgment and Award dated:26.05.2012
passed in MVC No.5456/2010 on the file of the XVII Addl.
Judge, Court of Small Causes, MACT, Mayohall Unit,
Bangalore, partly allowing the claim petition for
compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.

      These MFAs, coming on for admission, this day, this
Court, delivered the following:

                    JUDGMENT

Both the appeals are filed by the claimants under

Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act challenging

the judgment and award dated 26.05.2013 passed by

the MACT, Bangalore in MVC Nos.4905/2010 and

5456/2010. Since the challenge is to the same

judgment, both the appeals are clubbed together,

heard and common judgment is being passed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on

06.05.2010 at about 11.30 p.m. the deceased in MVC

No.4905/2010 was driving the tempo bearing

registration No.KA-51/5850 on NH-4 road. When he

reached near Petrol bunk, Oorukere, Tumkur, the

driver of the lorry bearing registration No.HR-38/K-

7061 came at a high speed, in a rash and negligent

manner and dashed against the tempo. As a result,

the deceased sustained injuries and he succumbed to

the injuries at the spot.

3. The mother of the deceased filed MVC

No.4905/2010 under Section 163-A of the Act on the

ground that the deceased was aged about 21 years at

the time of accident and was employed as a driver

and was earning Rs.40,000/- per annum. The owner

of the tempo filed MVC No.5456/2010 under Section

166 of the Act on the ground that the tempo was

totally burnt beyond repair in the accident and

claimant was earning Rs.50,000/- per month out of

the usage of the said tempo and the tempo was worth

Rs.8,00,000/- at the time of the accident. He claimed

a compensation to the tune of Rs.10,00,000/- along

with interest.

4. In order to support of their case, they have

examined claimant in MVC No.4905/2010 as PW-1 and

the claimant in MVC No.5456/2010 as PW-2 and the

Executive - Legal Claims of the insurance company as

PW-3 and got marked 10 documents as Ex.P1 to P10.

On the other hand, administrative officer of the

Insurance Company was examined as RW-1 and got

marked 2 documents as Exs.R1 and R2. After

appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal granted

compensation of Rs.3,75,000/- and 60% of

Rs.5,80,000/- respectively, with interest at 6% p.a.

and directed the insurance company to pay the

compensation. Being not satisfied with the same,

these appeals are filed seeking enhancement of

compensation.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the

claimants has raised the following contentions:

Firstly, MVC No.4905/2010 has been filed under

Section 163-A of the Act. At the time of the accident

the deceased was aged about 21 years and was

earning Rs.3,300/- per month. The Tribunal while

assessing the compensation has considered the age of

the mother of the deceased for consideration of

multiplier and the same is contrary to law.

Secondly, in MVC No.5456/2010 the Tribunal has

rightly accepted and quantified the compensation as

Rs.5,80,000/-, but no reasons are given by the

Tribunal for holding that the claimant is entitled to

60% of the total compensation. The same is contrary

to the materials available on record. Hence, he sought

for allowing the appeals.

6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for

the Insurance Company has raised the following

counter-contentions:

Firstly, in MVC No.4905/2010 at the time of the

accident the deceased was aged about 21 years and

he has not produced any document to establish that

he was earning Rs.3,300/- per month. The Tribunal

taking into consideration the materials available on

record has rightly granted compensation of

Rs.3,75,000/- and the overall compensation granted

by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and no

interference is called for.

Secondly, in MVC No.5456/2010 even though

the claimant claimed that the damaged caused to the

vehicle is Rs.5,80,000/-, he has not produced any

materials to establish the same. Therefore, the

Tribunal rightly granted 60% of Rs.5,80,000/-. Hence,

he sought for dismissal of the appeals.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Perused the judgment and award and lower court

records.

MFA No.3849/2013:

8. It is not in dispute that deceased died in

the road traffic accident occurred due to rash and

negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

The claim petition is filed under Section163-A of the

Act. In view of Schedule - II to the Act, the annual

income of the deceased has to be considered as

Rs.40,000/-. At the time of the accident, deceased

was aged about 21 years and the multiplier applicable

under Schedule-II is '17' and 1/3rd of the income of

the deceased has to be deducted towards personal

expenses. Accordingly, loss of dependency is

calculated:

Rs.40,000x2/3x17 = Rs.4,53,333/-.

In addition to that, claimant is entitled for Rs.2,000/-

for funeral expenses and Rs.2,500/- for loss of estate.

Accordingly, claimant is entitled to total compensation

of Rs.4,57,833/-.

MFA No.3850/2013:

9. In respect of damages to the vehicle is

concerned, it is not in dispute that due to the accident

the offending vehicle suffered damages. The claimant

has claimed compensation of Rs.5,80,000/-. The

Tribunal after considering the materials available on

record has rightly held that the total cost of the

vehicle damaged as Rs.5,80,000/-, but the Tribunal is

not justified in granting only 60% of the total

compensation amount. In view of the above, the

claimant is entitled to total compensation of

Rs.5,80,000/- for damage of the vehicle.

Accordingly, both the appeals are allowed in

part.

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit

the compensation amount along with interest at 6%

per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition

till the date of realization, within a period of four

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Cm/-