Karnataka High Court
The Managing Director vs Smt. Rangamma on 16 June, 2023
Bench: Alok Aradhe, Sachin Shankar Magadum
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:20953-DB
RP No. 64 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
REVIEW PETITION NO. 64 OF 2021
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KSRTC
MYSORE RURAL DIVISION,
MYSORE - 570 024
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. F.S.DABALI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. RANGAMMA
Digitally W/O MADAIAH,
signed by
ALBHAGYA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
Location:
HIGH 2. SRI MADAIAH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA S/O NANJAIAH
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
SINCE DIED, THE RESPONDENT NO.1, 3 & 4 ARE
HIS LRs
3. SMT. SUNITHA M
D/O MADAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:20953-DB
RP No. 64 of 2021
4. SRI SANTOSH M
S/O MADAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
ALL ARE R/AT NO.300
KUPPEGALA, VARUNA HOBLI
YEDAKOLA POST, MYSORE TALUK
MYSORE DISTRICT - 571 214
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.SHANTHARAJ, ADVOCATE R1, 3 & 4)
THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 114
R/W ORDER 47 RULE 1 OF CPC, PRAYING TO REVIEW
JUDGMENT DATED 27.09.2019 IN MFA NO.5349/2013, ON THE
FILE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT BY RECALLING THE SAID
JUDGMENT DATED 17.09.2019 AND REHEAR THE MFA
NO.5349/2013 ON MERITS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
EQUITY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDER, THIS DAY,
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the review petitioner
and the learned counsel for respondents 1, 3 and 4.
Perused the order under challenge.
2. The short point that needs consideration at the
hands of this Court is as to whether this Court having
applied the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the
case of National Insurance Company Limited .vs.
NC: 2023:KHC:20953-DB
RP No. 64 of 2021
Pranay Sethi and others1 was justified in adding 50%
towards future prospects. Our answer is "No". Therefore,
there is an error apparent on the face of the record.
Though this Court followed the law laid down by the Apex
Court in the case of Pranay Sethi(supra), however,
while determining the loss of future prospects has added
50%, which runs contrary to the dictum laid down in the
aforesaid judgment. Therefore, we are of the view that
the review petition is liable to be allowed.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the review
petitioner and the learned counsel for the claimants, the
income of the deceased is notionally assessed at
Rs.8,000/-. Adding 40% towards future prospects, the
total income is arrived at Rs.11,200/- [Rs.8,000 + 3,200].
The deceased was a bachelor. Therefore, 50% needs to
be deducted towards personal expenses, which works out
to [Rs.11,200x50/100]= Rs.5,600/-. Adopting the
multiplier of 17, the compensation payable under the head
(2017) 16 scc 980
NC: 2023:KHC:20953-DB
RP No. 64 of 2021
of loss of dependency works out to Rs.11,42,400/-, to
which the respondents-claimants are held entitled.
However, compensation determined under the other heads
stands undisturbed.
4. Thus, the respondents-claimants are entitled to
following compensation:
Sl. Heads Rs. Ps.
No.
1. Loss of dependency 11,42,400/-
2. Loss of filial consortium 60,000/-
3. Loss of love and affection 60,000/-
4. Loss of estate 15,000/-
5. Funeral expenses 15,000/-
Total 12,92,400/-
The claimants are held entitled to total compensation of
Rs.12,92,400/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
NC: 2023:KHC:20953-DB
RP No. 64 of 2021
5. Accordingly, the review petition is partly
allowed and the impugned judgment is modified to the
above extent. Office to draw the award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
ALB
