Mr Seenappa @ Srinivasa vs C P Rajashekar
2022 Latest Caselaw 9741 Kant

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU


         DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                        BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

              M.F.A.NO.7463/2017 (MV)

BETWEEN

1 . MR SEENAPPA @ SRINIVASA
    S/O LATE SOMAIAH
    AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
    R/O SUBHASHNAGARA
    KADUR TOWN, KADUR TALUK
    CHIKMAGALURU DIST.

2 . SMT NEELAMMA
    W/O SEENAPPA,
    R/O SUBHASHNAGARA,
    KADUR TOWN, KADUR TALUK,
    CHIKMAGALURU DIST
                                        ...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT.B.N.MANJULA,
FOR SRI NAGARAJ R C, ADVOCATES)

AND

1.    C P RAJASHEKAR
      S/O C M PARVATHAPPA,
      AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
      R/O CHENNAPURA VILLAGE,
      SARASWATHIPURA POST,
      KASABA HOBLI, KADUR TALUK,
      CHIKMAGALURU DIST
                            -2-




2.   THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
     PANDURANGA COMPLEX,
     KOLLAPURADAMMA TEMPLE ROAD,
     CHIKMAGALURU
                                  ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI GOPALKRISHNA KURANDWAD, ADVOCATE FOR
R1;
SRI K POORNABODHA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

     THIS M.F.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
17.05.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.144/2010 ON THE FILE
OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, KADUR. PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

     THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                    JUDGMENT

This appeal is preferred by the claimants challenging

the judgment and award dated 17.05.2017 passed in MVC

No.144/2010 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge & Motor

Accident Claim Tribunal at Kadur, Chikkamagaluru District.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under:

That on 16.06.2010 at 10.30 pm, the deceased Raju

was riding the bike from Kadur to Birur on N.H-206 Road,

while he reached at MESCOM, at that time 1st Respondent

being the rider of the bike bearing regn. No.KA-18-Q-

5945, drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and

dashed to the motor cycle, in which deceased Raju was

proceeding, Consequent to which deceased Raju sustained

multiple injuries and died at the spot. That the deceased

Raju was doing coolie work and earning Rs.39,000/- per

annum. The deceased Raju was also looking after all the

affairs of the family and petitioners were solely depending

upon income of the deceased Raju and petitioners have

put to untold hardship, loss of income, love and affection

and inconvenience etc., Since the accident took place on

account of rash and negligent driving of vehicle in question

by its rider cum owner 1st Respondent and second

respondent is the insurer, both are jointly and severally

liable to pay compensation to the Petitioner with interest

as claimed.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants

submitted that the amount of compensation awarded by

the Tribunal is inadequate. Hence, prays for enhancement

of compensation.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the

second respondent Insurance Company submitted that the

total compensation derived and awarded is correct and

prays to dismiss the appeal.

5. The claimants have filed the claim petition under

Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking

compensation for the death of Raju S/o. Seenappa, in a

road traffic accident that took place on 16.06.2010.

Therefore, the compensation claimed by the claimants

invoking structured formula basis.

6. The Tribunal, upon considering the petition filed

under Section 163-A of the MV Act, held the annual

income at Rs.40,000/- and after deducting 1/3rd amount

towards personal and living expenses of the deceased

would be Rs.2,26,666/- and accordingly granted

compensation in a sum of Rs.4,53,333/- under the head of

loss of dependency. Further, in addition to it, under

general damages as provided under II Schedule, the

claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.2,000/-

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

estate respectively. This is under challenge the claimants

seeking enhancement of compensation.

7. In the present case, the claimants are awarded a

total compensation in a sum of Rs.4,53,333/- which is

determined on a structured formula basis as per II

Schedule of the Motor Vehicles Act. Further, in the

present case, the deceased himself was riding the motor

cycle, which met with an accident and that the accident

has occurred on his own negligence. Therefore, under

the principle of no fault liability, the compensation is to be

determined and awarded. The Tribunal has taken the

income at Rs.40,000/- per annum and accordingly

determined total compensation in a sum of Rs.6,80,000/-

and after deducting 1/3rd amount towards personal and

living expenses, the compensation works out to

Rs.4,53,333/-.

8. The age of the deceased was 26 years at the time of

accident and it is proved from the Post Mortem report in the

absence of any other documents. Therefore, appropriate

Multiplier to be applied is '17' as per SARLA VERMA AND

OTHERS Vs. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND

ANOTHER reported in 2009(6) SCC 121. If 1/3rd of the

amount is deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased,

then loss of dependency calculated would be Rs.40,000/- x 2 / 3

x 17 = 4,53,333/-. Further, the Tribunal has awarded

compensation of Rs.2,000/- towards funeral expenses and

Rs.2,500/- towards loss of estate, as per Schedule-II of the Motor

Vehicles Act, which is found to be correct and appropriate.

Therefore, in all respects, the Tribunal has correctly awarded the

compensation and Therefore, there is no ground available to

make enhancement of the compensation. Hence, the appeal is

liable to be dismissed by confirming the judgment and award

passed by the Tribunal. Accordingly, this court pass the

following:

ORDER

(i) The appeal is dismissed.

(ii) The judgment and award dated 17.05.2017 passed in

MVC No.144/2010 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge & MACT,

Kadur, Chikkamagaluru District, is hereby confirmed and;

(iii) No order as to costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

PL*