Karnataka High Court

Smt R Chandramma vs The Managing Director on 8 April, 2024

                                                       -1-
                                                                  NC: 2024:KHC:14488
                                                                MFA No. 3502 of 2017




                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                                 DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

                                                   BEFORE
                               THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
                           MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3502 OF 2017 (MV-D)

                      BETWEEN:

                      1.    SMT. R. CHANDRAMMA
                            W/O. SHANKARAPPA
                            AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS.

                      2.    SRI SHANKARAPPA
                            S/O. LATE A. NARAYANAPPA
                            AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS.

                            RESIDING AT MARIKUPPAM VILLAGE
                            ROBERTSONPET HOBLI, BANGARPET TALUK
                            KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 101.
                                                                        ...APPELLANTS
                            (BY SRI VISHWANATHA K., ADVOCATE)

                      AND:

                            THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
                            A.P.S.R.T.C. MUSHEERABAD
Digitally signed by
MOUNESHWARAPPA              HYDERABAD (A.P.)
NAGARATHNA
Location: HIGH                                                         ...RESPONDENT
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                   (BY SRI D. VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE)
                                                    ***

                           THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
                      SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V. ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
                      AWARD DATED 25-10-2016 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.196 OF 2014 ON
                      THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND PRINCIPAL J.M.F.C.,
                      AND M.A.C.T., K.G.F., PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
                      COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

                           THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
                      FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
                      FOLLOWING:
                                -2-
                                                NC: 2024:KHC:14488
                                             MFA No. 3502 of 2017




                      JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimants aggrieved by the

judgment and award dated 25-10-2016 passed in M.V.C.

No.196 of 2014 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and

Principal Judicial Magistrate First Class and Motor Vehicles

Accident Claims Tribunal, K.G.F, whereby, the Tribunal

awarded a sum of Rs.9,22,400/- as compensation with

interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of

filing the petition till the date of deposit.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein

shall be referred to in terms of their status before the

Tribunal.

3. The parents of Sri S. Bhaskar (hereinafter referred

to as 'deceased') filed a claim petition under Section 166

of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation of

Rs.10 lakh inter alia contending that on 14-3-2014, the

deceased was proceeding to his sister's house at

Byreddipalli Village of Chittoor District in a motorcycle,

bearing Registration No.KA-08/L-2053, by observing traffic

NC: 2024:KHC:14488

rules. At about 1:30 p.m., when the deceased reached

near Padigalakuppam Village on V. Kota-Kuppam Road of

Chittoor District, the driver of APSRTC bus, bearing

Registration No.AP-28/Z-84, came in rash and negligent

manner and dashed against the motorcycle, as a result,

the deceased sustained grievous injuries and died on the

spot. The claimants, being parents of the deceased,

contended that the deceased was working as a Coolie by

occupation, expert in wire binding in building constructions

and earning Rs.300/- per day. Due to his death, they have

lost their dependency and hence, claimed the

compensation on various heads.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and

perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.

5. As there is no dispute regarding the death of the

deceased in a road traffic accident occurred on

14-3-2014 due to rash and negligent driving of APSRTC

bus, bearing Registration No.AP-28/Z-84, by its driver and

NC: 2024:KHC:14488

liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the only

point that arises for my consideration in this appeal is:

"Whether quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?"

6. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for

the parties and perusing the judgment and award of the

Tribunal, I am of the view that the compensation awarded

by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it is on the

lower side and hence, it is required to be enhanced.

7. In order to substantiate their claim, claimant

No.1-mother of the deceased examined herself as PW1

and got marked eight documents as Exs.P1 to P8. The

driver of APSRTC was examined as RW1 and got marked

five documents as Exs.R1 to R5.

8. The claimants have established the fact that the

offending vehicle dashed against the motorcycle of the

deceased, as a result, the deceased sustained injuries and

NC: 2024:KHC:14488

died on the spot. The claimants have stated that at the

time of the accident, the deceased was working as a Coolie

and was earning Rs.300/- per day. The claimants have

not furnished any documents to prove that the deceased

was earning Rs.300/- per day. The accident is of the year

2014. During the relevant period, the notional income

considered is Rs.8,500/- per month. As per the dictum of

the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National

Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and

Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, 40% of the

income has to be added towards future prospects, which

comes to Rs.3,400/- (8,500 X 40%) and the total income

comes to Rs.11,900/- per month (8,500 + 3,400). The

claimants, i.e. mother and father of the deceased, are the

dependents of the deceased and the deceased was a

bachelor, therefore, 50% of the income shall be deducted

towards the personal expenses of the deceased and it

works out to Rs.5,950/- per month (11,900 X 50%). The

applicable multiplier would be '18' for the age group up to

25 years and it works out to Rs.12,85,200/- (5,950 X 12 X

NC: 2024:KHC:14488

18). This would be the 'loss of dependency' as against

Rs.8,42,400/- awarded by the Tribunal.

9. In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex

Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.

v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and Others reported in

2018 ACJ 2782 (SC), the claimants are entitled for

Rs.40,000/- each towards 'loss of filial consortium'.

10. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- towards

'transportation of dead body and funeral expenses' and

Rs.10,000/- towards 'loss of estate'. In view of the law

laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay

Sethi supra, the Tribunal has rightly awarded the amount

under these heads and hence, no interference in that

regard is called for by this Court.

11. Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following

compensation:

NC: 2024:KHC:14488

HEADS Rs.

Loss of dependency 12,85,200.00 Loss of filial consortium/loss of love and affection 80,000.00 (Rs.40,000 X 2 dependants/claimants) Expenses towards transportation of 20,000.00 dead body and funeral expenses Loss of estate 10,000.00 TOTAL 13,95,200.00 Less: Compensation awarded by the 9,22,400.00 Tribunal ENHANCED COMPENSATION 4,72,800.00

12. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The

judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to

the extent stated herein above. The claimants are entitled

for a total compensation of Rs.13,95,200/- as against

Rs.9,22,400/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the

rate of 6% per annum on the additional compensation of

Rs.4,72,800/- from the date of filing of the claim petition

till the date of its realisation.

13. The respondent-Corporation is directed to deposit

the additional compensation amount together with interest

within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.