Smt Sowmya vs The Depot Manager
2022 Latest Caselaw 13114 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 13114 Kant
Judgement Date : 17 November, 2022

Karnataka High Court

Smt Sowmya vs The Depot Manager on 17 November, 2022

Bench: H.P.Sandesh

                              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

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.

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

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




             M.V.C.No.169/2014,       is   modified    granting