Karnataka High Court
Karnataka State Road Transport ... vs Sujatha on 13 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:45384
MFA No. 6784 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6784 OF 2012 (MV)
BETWEEN:
KARNATAKA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
KOLAR REPRESENTED BY ITS
DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. P.B. RAJU, ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. H.R. RENUKA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SUJATHA,
W/O SRINIVASALU,
D/O LATE GAVIT THIMMAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS,
Digitally R/O KRISHNAPURA VILLAGE,
signed by CHITOOR DISTRICT,
JAI JYOTHI J A.P. NOW AT KOLADEVI TEMPLE,
Location: MULBAGAL TALUK - 563 131.
HIGH
COURT OF 2. K.V. KRISHNAPPA,
KARNATAKA
S/O LATE VENKATAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS,
R/O ASALI ATHIUNTE VILLAGE,
MULBAGAL TALUK - 563 131.
3. N. PRABHAKAR,
S/O NARAYANAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:45384
MFA No. 6784 of 2012
R/O IIDONI VILLAGE,
SRINIVASAPUR TALUK,
KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M.R. NANJUNDA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2 AND R3 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.03.2012 PASSED IN MVC
NO.183/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, KOLAR, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF
RS.2,90,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF
PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal filed by the KSRTC aggrieved by the
award passed in MVC No.183/2008 dated 28.03.2012 on
the file of II Addl. Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Kolar
whereby the Court below had granted compensation of an
amount of Rs.2,90,000/-.
2. It is the case of the claimant that the deceased is
the brother of the claimant and he was the bus driver
NC: 2023:KHC:45384
under the respondent's depot. He met with an accident
and sustained injuries and later he succumbed to the said
injuries on 12.01.2008 at about 6:20 a.m.
3. The Court below considering the evidence on
record had taken the income at Rs.3,000/- i.e., Rs.100/-
per day and as he is a bachelor, had deducted 50%
towards personal expenses and by applying the multiplier
of 15 had granted an amount of Rs.2,70,000/- towards
loss of dependency, towards love and affection, an amount
of Rs.10,000/-, towards burial, funeral and obsequies an
amount of Rs.5,000/- and towards conveyance charges an
amount of Rs.5,000/- was granted. Altogether,
compensation of an amount of Rs.2,90,000/- was awarded
by the Court below.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant
submits that the Court below ought not to have granted
loss of dependency as they are not depending upon the
income of the deceased. Further, towards loss of love and
NC: 2023:KHC:45384
affection also they are not entitled for any amount. It is
submitted that the compensation that was awarded was
on the higher side.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent
submits that the Court below had rightly considered the
evidence on record and granted compensation of an
amount of Rs.2,90,000/- and he submits that no grounds
are made out seeking interference with the well-
considered award passed by the Tribunal.
6. Having heard the learned counsel on either side,
perused the entire material on record. In this case, the
claimant No.2 is the brother and claimant Nos.1 and 3 are
his daughter and son i.e., the niece and nephew of the
deceased. There is no dispute about the fact that they are
not dependent on the income of the deceased. But as
they are the legal representatives, they are entitled for the
loss of estate. The Division Bench of this Court in the case
NC: 2023:KHC:45384
of A. Manavalagan vs A. Krishnamurthy And Others1,
where there is no dependency, considered 1/4th of the
income under the head of loss of estate. Hence in this
case, the Court below had taken the income at Rs.3,000/-
and considering his age, he is entitled for 40% future
prospectus. It comes to an amount of Rs.1,200/- i.e.,
Rs.4,200/-. In that 1/4th has to be treated i.e.,
Rs.1,050x12x15 = Rs.1,89,000/- is granted towards
loss of dependency. Even as per the judgment in the
case of Magma General Insurance Co. Limited v.
Nanu Ram & Others2, they are not entitled for
compensation towards loss of consortium. An amount of
Rs.33,000/- is granted towards funeral expenses.
Altogether, compensation of an amount of
Rs.2,22,000/-.
7. The claimant is therefore, entitled to the
compensation under the following heads:
ILR 2004 KAR 3268
2018 ACJ 2782
NC: 2023:KHC:45384
Heads Compensation
Awarded
1. Loss of dependency : Rs. 1,89,000/-
2. Funeral expenses : Rs. 33,000/-
TOTAL : Rs.
2,22,000/-
8. Accordingly, the appeal of the KSRTC is allowed-
in-part by reducing the compensation from an amount of
Rs.2,90,000/- to Rs.2,22,000/- setting aside the award
passed in MVC No.183/2008 dated 28.03.2012.
i. If any excess amount is deposited, the KSRTC
is at liberty to withdraw the same.
ii. The amount in deposit shall be forthwith
transferred to the Court below.
iii. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court
Records to the Tribunal, along with certified
copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith
transmitted without any delay.
NC: 2023:KHC:45384
iv. No costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MEG
CT: BHK
