Karnataka High Court
The Managing Director vs B. Rama @ Ramaiah on 24 November, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:45602
MFA No. 6018 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6018 OF 2017 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
BANGALORE METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
(B.M.T.C.),
CENTRAL OFFICE,
K.H. ROAD,
SHANTHINAGAR,
BANGALORE-560 027,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.F.S.DABALI.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally 1. SRI.B.RAMA @ RAMAIAH,
signed by JAI S/O BEERAIAH,
JYOTHI J
Location:
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,
HIGH
COURT OF 2. SMT.SHIVAMMA,
KARNATAKA
W/O B.RAMA @ RAMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT
NO.10/2, 8TH CROSS,
RUDRAPPA GARDEN,
KASTURIBA NAGARA,
BANGALORE-560 026.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.V.JAVAHAR BABU.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND 2)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:45602
MFA No. 6018 of 2017
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.05.2017 PASSED IN MVC
NO.3483/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 9TH ADDITIONAL SMALL
CAUSES JUDGE & 34TH ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES,
MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION
OF RS.15,90,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE
DATE OF THE PETITION TILL THE DATE OF PAYMENT.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This is an appeal filed by the BMTC aggrieved by the
award passed in M.V.C.No.3483/2016, on the file of the IX
Additional Small Causes Judge and XXXIV ACMM Court of
Small Causes, Member, MACT-7, Bengaluru (SCCH-7),
dated 22.05.2017 whereby the Tribunal had granted
compensation of an amount of Rs.15,90,000/-.
2. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation
of an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- for the injuries sustained
by the claimant for the death of the deceased in the
accident. According to the claimant, he was working as a
helper in Pasolight Electrical Private Limited, Plot No.24,
2nd phase, Gerupalya main road, Kumbalagodu, Bengaluru
and drawing the salary of Rs.10,000/-. In this regard, they
NC: 2023:KHC:45602
have produced Ex.P13 letter dated 31.05.2016 issued by
the Pasolite Electrical Pvt. Ltd., and as per the same he is
earning an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month. The Court
below had taken Rs.10,000/- and the Court has considered
the future prospects at 50% and by deducting half of the
amount has granted an amount of Rs.15,30,000/- under
the head of loss of dependency.Towards funeral expenses
granted an amount of Rs.25,000/-, loss of love and
affection granted an amount of Rs.25,000/-,
Transportation of dead body granted an amount
Rs.5,000/- and towards loss of estate granted an amount
of Rs.20,000/-. Altogether, the compensation of an
amount of Rs.16,05,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal.
3. The Learned counsel appearing for the BMTC
submits that the except filing Ex.P13 no person was
examined in support of the income of the deceased in that
case the Court below ought not to have taken Rs.10,000/-
as the income. Further it is submitted that the deceased
would be entitled for 40% of future prospects but not
NC: 2023:KHC:45602
50%. But Court had taken 50% as future prospects and
granted the amount. He submits that even under the
conventional heads also the Tribunal had granted amounts
which are on the higher side. It is submitted that at any
rate the compensation that is granted is excessive and the
rate of interest is also on the higher side.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the claimant
submits that the Court below had rightly considered
Ex.P13 which shows that the claimant is earning an
amount of Rs.10,000/- per month and had rightly granted
the compensation. He submits that no grounds are made
out for reducing the compensation or interfering with the
impugned order passed by the MACT.
5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side,
perused the entire material on record.
6. The Court below basing on Ex.P13 had taken the
income at Rs.10,000/-. There is no dispute that no one
was examined in support of Ex.P13 and the Tribunal ought
not to have considered the income at Rs.10,000/- per
NC: 2023:KHC:45602
month. As this is an accident of the year 2016 this Court is
inclined to take an amount of Rs.9,500/- as income.
Further future prospects the claimants are entitled at
40%. Rs.9,500+40% future prospects come to Rs.3,800/-
i.e., (9500+3800) 13,300/-. As he is a bachelor 50% has
to be deducted towards personal expenses. His
contribution to family will be (Rs.6,650x12x17) i.e., an
amount of Rs.13,56,600/- is the loss of dependency.
Towards consortium for mother and father (Rs.44,000x2)
88,000/-, towards funeral expenses granted an amount of
Rs.33,000/-. Altogether, compensation of an amount of
Rs.14,77,600/- is awarded. It is submitted that BMTC has
already paid Rs.15,000/-. Hence, if Rs.15,000/- is
deducted from the said amount, it comes to an amount of
Rs.14,62,600/-.
7. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for
the appellant the interest is granted at 9% p.a., which is
exorbitant and the same is reduced to 6% p.a,.
NC: 2023:KHC:45602
i) Accordingly, the Appeal of the BMTC is
partly allowed, reducing the
compensation from an amount of
Rs.15,90,000/- to Rs.14,62,600/-.
ii) The entire amount shall carry 6%
interest.
iii) The amount in deposit shall be forthwith
transferred to the Court below.
iv) The BMTC shall deposit the amount within
a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt of copy of the judgment. On such
deposit, the claimant is entitled to
withdraw the entire amount without
furnishing any security.
v) Registry is directed to return the Trial
Court Records to the Tribunal, along with
certified copy of the judgment passed by
this Court forthwith without any delay.
NC: 2023:KHC:45602
vi) The amount in deposit shall be released in
favour of the Insurance Company
forthwith.
vii) No costs.
8. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RMS
