Karnataka High Court
Smt. Swarupa Sriram vs A S Justride Tours And Travels on 10 June, 2022
Bench: Krishna S Dixit, P.Krishna Bhat
-1-
WA No.100219/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.KRISHNA BHAT
WRIT APPEAL NO. 100219 OF 2022 (GM-AC)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SWARUPA
W/O. SRI RAM ALIAS SHRIRAMCHANDRA,
AGE 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE,
2. KUMARA NEHIL
S/O. SRIRAM ALIAS SHRIRAMCHANDRA,
AGE 16 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
3. KUMAR SWAPNIL
S/O. SRIRAM ALIAS SHRIRAMCHANDRA,
AGE 13 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
H.NO.2710, MAHANTESH NAGAR,
M.E. EXTENTION, BEHIND SRINAGAR GARDEN,
SECTOR 12, BELGAUM,
NOW RESIDING AT
FLAT NO.203-HB-6, HIG APARTMENT,
Digitally signed ANEKAL MAIN ROAD, CHANDAPURA PHASE-1,
by VINAYAKA B
VINAYAKA V
Location:
BENGALURU-99,
BV DHARWAD
Date: 2022.06.13
11:43:17 +0530
SURYA NAGAR, KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD,
SINCE APPELLANT NOS. 2 & 3 ARE
-2-
WA No.100219/2022
MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR
MOTHER - APPELLANT NO.1.
... APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI DEEPAK MAGANUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. A.S. JUSTRIDE TOURS AND TRAVELS,
REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR,
OCC. OWNER OF MARUTI ERTIGA CAR,
R/O: PLOT NO.432/A, 9TH MAIN, 4TH CROSS,
HAL 3RD STAGE, INDRANAGAR,
BENGALURU- 5600075.
2. CHOLAMANDALAM M.S. GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD.,
REP. BY ITS MANAGER,
MARUTI ERTIGA CAR NO.KA-036/AF-6772,
BRANCH OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR,
KALBUGI SQUARE, DESAI CROSS,
DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBBALLI - 580029,
KARNATAKA.
3. SHRI MARIYAPPA S/O. NAGAPPA KUNTOJI,
AGE 77 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: 10 WARD, PANNAPUR CROSS,
POST KARATGI, TQ: GANGAVATHI,
DIST: KOPPAL - 583229.
... RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS
HON'BLE COURT TO, PLEASED TO CALL FOR RECORDS
AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE DATED 2ND FEBRUARY 2022, PASSED IN W.P.
NO.116433/2019 AND ALLOW WRIT PETITION IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
P. KRISHNA BHAT, J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
WA No.100219/2022
JUDGMENT
1. Appellant No.1 herein is the widow of one
Sriram @ Sriramchandra and appellant Nos.2 & 3 are the
children of the appellant No.1 of the said Sriram @
Sriramchandra. On the unfortunate death of said Sriram @
Sriramchandra in a motor vehicle accident, the appellants
instituted claim proceedings in MVC No.651/2019 on the
file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge,
Belagavi. The deceased Sriram @ Sriramchandra had left
behind him, his father Mariyappa S/o. Nagappa Kuntoji
(respondent No.3), whom the appellants had arrayed as
respondent No.3 in the claim petition. Respondent No.3
had filed an application for transposing him as claimant
No.4 and after hearing the learned counsel on both sides,
the learned MACT allowed the said application and
accordingly respondent No.3 herein was transposed as
petitioner No.4. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants
filed W.P. No.116433/2019, which after hearing, by an
order dated 02nd February 2022 came to be dismissed by
the learned Single Judge of this Court.
WA No.100219/2022
2. The only contention in support of this appeal
made by Shri Deepak Maganur, learned counsel for the
appellants, is that on account of the transposition of
respondent No.3 as claimant No.4, the appellants' precious
right of cross-examining him and establishing that he is
not a dependant on the deceased Sriram @ Sriramchandra
has been taken away and therefore, the order of the
learned MACT allowing respondent No.3's application and
confirming the said order by the learned Single Judge are
both illegal and liable to be set aside.
3. Clause (c), sub-section (1) of Section 166 of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, reads as follows:
"166. Application for compensation.- (1) An
application for compensation arising out of an
accident of the nature specified in sub-section
(1) of section 165 may be made.- XXXXX
(c) where death has resulted from the
accident, by all or any of the legal
representative of the deceased; or
4. On interpreting the said provision, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., VS.
BIRENDER AND OTHERS reported in 2020 ACJ 759 has
clearly held that the spouse and the children of the
WA No.100219/2022
deceased are entitled to maintain a petition seeking
compensation for the death of a person on whom they
were dependent. The question regarding the right of the
claimants to establish the fact as to whether respondent
No.3 was really dependent on the income of the deceased
is a matter to be established by the appellants
independently by leading cogent evidence before the
learned MACT.
5. In regard to the apprehension of the appellants
herein that since respondent No.3 has claimed equal share
in the compensation to be ultimately adjudicated by the
learned MACT is concerned, we have no doubt in our mind
that the learned MACT will apply its mind keeping in view
the applicable principles of law regarding the
apportionment of the compensation as between the
claimants inter se while passing the final award. In that
view of the matter, mere transposition of respondent No.3,
who undoubtedly is the father of the deceased does not
alter legal situation or the legal rights of the appellants in
any manner and regardless of respondent No.3 being
transposed as claimant No.4, it is open to them to
WA No.100219/2022
establish independently the quantum of income respondent
No.3 might be earning, if any, without the assistance or
contribution by the deceased.
6. In that view of the matter, there is no error or
illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge or
the learned MACT and we also are satisfied that no
injustice has been caused to the appellants herein on
account of the said order.
7. In that view of the matter, this appeal being
devoid of merits, is dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
Vnp*
