Karnataka High Court
Bharat S/O Shahu Sabakale vs The Divisional Controller on 4 January, 2023
Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani
-1-
MFA No. 101232 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
MISC. FIRST APPEAL NO.101232 OF 2015 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. BHARAT S/O SHAHU SABAKALE,
AGE:39 YEARS,
OCC:KIRANA SHOP and AGRIL.,
2. RITISH S/O BHARAT SABAKALE,
AGE:07 YEARS,
M/G BY BHARAT S/O SHAHU SABAKALE,
BOTH ARE R/O GIRAGAON,
TQ: JATH, DIST: SANGLI
... APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. ANAND R KOLLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
M.S.R.T.C. KOLHAPUR DIVISION,
KOLHAPUR.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. C.V. ANGADI, ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18-05-2013
PASSED IN MVC.NO.934/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MACT, ATHANI,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING ON I.A, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED FOLLOWING:
-2-
MFA No. 101232 of 2015
JUDGMENT
Challenging impugned judgment and award
dated 18.05.2013 passed by Additional Senior Civil
Judge and JMFC and Additional MACT, Athani, in
MVC No.934/2012, this appeal is filed by claimants
seeking for enhancement of compensation.
2. Undisputed facts are that in an accident that
occurred on 13.03.2012, deceased Swati W/o Bharat
Sabakale traveling as a pillion rider on motorcycle bearing
registration no.MH-13/AM-3759 sustained fatal injuries
when bus bearing registration no.MH-14/BT-0965 dashed
against motorcycle, due to rash and negligent driving by
bus driver. Bus belonged to respondent - Corporation.
3. Alleging loss of dependency, who are husband
and minor son of deceased filed claim petition under
Section 166 of M.V. Act, against owner of Bus.
4. Sri. D.V. Pattar, advocate appearing for
Sri. Anand R Kolli, learned counsel for appellants -
MFA No. 101232 of 2015
claimants submitted that appeal is filed on limited grounds
for enhancement. It was firstly stated that deceased was
house wife and was doing agricultural work along with
assisting appellant in maintaining Kirani shop and earning
Rs.8000/- per month. However, tribunal considered her
monthly income at meager amount of Rs.2000/- and same
calls for enhancement.
5. It was further submitted that even award under
conventional heads was not in tune with law laid down in
National Insurance Company Ltd., v/s Pranay Sethi
and Ors., reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157. Further,
tribunal failed to add future prospects. On said ground,
seeks for allowing appeal.
6. On other hand, Sri. C.V. Angadi, learned
counsel for respondent sought to support impugned award
and submitted that no enhancement was called for. It was
specifically contended that to substantiate deceased was
running Kirani shop no records were produced, even no
MFA No. 101232 of 2015
shop license is produced. Therefore, income considered by
tribunal was justified.
7. From above submission, only point that arises
for consideration is:
"Whether compensation determined by
tribunal requires to be enhanced as sought
for?"
8. Insofar as monthly income, though claimant
stated that deceased was doing agricultural, assisting in
Kirani shop and earning about Rs.8,000/-, there is no
specific evidence placed to substantiate same. Under
circumstances, same has to be assessed nationally.
Notional income for year 2012 is Rs.6,500/-. Even in
absence of any proof regarding Kirani business, said
income has to be considered.
9. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi's case
(supra), held that in case of self employed person aged
below 40 years, future prospects @ 40% has to be added.
Since claimants are husband and minor child deduction
MFA No. 101232 of 2015
towards personal expenses will be @ 1/3rd only. Further,
compensation of Rs.15000/- towards funeral expenses and
Rs.15000/- towards loss of estate also awarded. In
addition, Rs.40,000/- towards spousal consortium to
claimant no.1 and filial consortium to claimant no.2, has to
be awarded. Award of Rs.40,000/- under conventional
heads would be inadequate. Therefore, total compensation
would be as follows:
Loss of dependency Rs.6,500/- + 40% - 1/3rd X 12 X
17 = Rs.12,37,600/- + Rs.80,000/- + Rs.30,000/-. Since
more than 3 years have lapsed after rendering decision in
Pranay Sethi's case (supra) there has to be addition of
10% on award under conventional heads. Thus, claimants
would be entitled to total compensation of
Rs.13,58,600/-. Point for consideration is answered
partly in affirmative as above.
10. Hence, I pass following:
ORDER
i. Appeal is allowed.
MFA No. 101232 of 2015
ii. Claimants are entitled for total compensation
of Rs.13,58,600/-, with interest @ 6% per
annum from date of claim petition till deposit
except for period of 609 days as per order on
I.A.no.1/2016.
iii. Respondent - Corporation is directed to
deposit balance compensation amount within
three months.
SD/-
JUDGE
VMB/GRD
