Karnataka High Court
Smt.Lakkawwa W/O Rama Shiragure vs The Divisional Manager on 2 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
MFA No. 103578 of 2015
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
MFA No. 103007 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103578 OF 2015
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102081 OF 2015
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103007 OF 2015
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103578 OF 2015
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. MAYAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
2. SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O BALAPPA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: NIL
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
VISHAL ...APPELLANTS
NINGAPPA
PATTIHAL
Location: HIGH COURT
(BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA A MALI, ADVOCATE)
OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
Date: 2024.04.24
16:42:24 +0530 AND:
1. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
NWKRTC, BELAGAVI.
2. SMT.LAKKAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
3. KUMARI DEEPA D/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
MFA No. 103578 of 2015
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
MFA No. 103007 of 2015
4. KUMAR AMASIDDA S/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
(SINCE R3 & R4 ARE MINORS R/BY NEXT FRIEND
NATURAL MOTHER I.E., RESPONDENT NO.2
SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M K SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1,
SRI. VITTHAL S TELI, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.03.2015 PASSED IN MVC
NO.177/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST
TRACK COURT-I AND MEMBER ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIM TRIBUNAL BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102081 OF 2015
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
NWKRTC, DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
BELAGAVI-590016.
R/BY CHIEF LAW OFFICER,
NWKRTC GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI-580030.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. M K SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. MAYAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG-591317,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
MFA No. 103578 of 2015
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
MFA No. 103007 of 2015
2. SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O BALAPPA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAGH-591317,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
3. SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAGH-591317,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
4. KUMARI DEEPA D/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAGH-591317,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
5. KUMAR AMASIDDA S/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAGH-591317,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
(R4 & R5 ARE MINORS R/BY R3 AS N/G)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA A MALI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2,
SRI. VITTHAL S TELI, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.03.2015 PASSED IN MVC
NO.177/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST
TRACK COURT-I AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM
TRIBUNAL BELAGAVI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.
10,83,000/- WTH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A FROM THE
DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION.
IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103007 OF 2015
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 32 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE/HOUSEHOLD WORK,
2. KUMARI DEEPA D/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
MFA No. 103578 of 2015
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
MFA No. 103007 of 2015
3. KUMAR AMASIDDA S/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
APPELLANT NO. 2 & 3 MINOR R/BY APPELLANT NO.1
NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER
ALL ARE R/O: ALAGAWADI,
TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. VITTHAL S TELI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
NWKRTC, BELAGAVI.
2. SMT.MAYAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
PRESENTLY CALLED HERSELF AS
SMT.MAYAWWA W/O BALLAPPA KARAGAVI
R/O:BADAMI KHEDI, CHINCHALLI VILLAGE, RAIBAG.
3. SMT.LAKKAWWA W/O BALAPPA SHIRAGURE
AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
RESPONDENT NO 2 AND 3
R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. M K SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1,
SRI. RAMACHANDRA A MALI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.03.2015 PASSED IN MVC
NO.177/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST
TRACK COURT-I AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM
TRIBUNAL BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, UMESH M. ADIGA, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
MFA No. 103578 of 2015
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
MFA No. 103007 of 2015
JUDGMENT
These appeals are filed by the claimants as well as North-
West Karnataka Road Transportation Corporation (for short,
'Corporation'), Belagavi, challenging the impugned judgment
and award passed by the Fast Track Court-I and Addl. MACT,
Belagavi (for short, 'Tribunal'), in MVC No.177/2009 dated
13.03.2015.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per the rankings before the Tribunal.
3. It is the case of claimants that on 11.11.2008 at
about 1.30 p.m., one Rama was going as pedestrian at
Harugeri-Athani road. When he reached Harugeri, he met with
an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the bus
belonging to the Corporation, bearing registration No.KA-23/F-
462 by its driver. As a result of which, Rama sustained
grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries at the spot.
4. It is the further case of the claimants that Smt.
Mayavva and Smt. Lakkawwa claims to be the wives of Late
Rama. Petitioner No.2 is mother and respondent Nos.3 and 4
are children of Late Rama. The deceased was aged about 32
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
years and he was doing centering work and earning Rs.6,000/-
p.m. It is also contended that he was an agriculturist and
earning Rs.1,00,000/- p.a. The claimants were depending
upon the income of the deceased. With these reasons, they
prayed to award compensation of Rs.12,00,000/-. It appears
that respondent Nos.2 to 4 were got impleaded during course
of trial before Tribunal.
5. The respondent No.1 in written statement denied all
the contentions of the claimants and it has further stated that
accident took place due to negligence of the deceased.
Therefore, prayed to reject the claim petition.
6. From the rival contentions of the parties, the
Tribunal has framed necessary issues.
7. Claimants to prove their contentions have examined
PW-1 to PW-3 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-46. It appears that
PW-1 did not offer for further evidence and cross-examination
and her evidence was discarded by the Tribunal. Respondent
No.2 was partly examined as PW-2. The said mistake was
corrected and she was examined as RW-1 by discarding her
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
evidence as PW-2. Respondents have examined RW-1 to RW-3
and got marked Ex.R-1.
8. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties and
appreciating the evidence on record, assessed the age of the
deceased as 37 years, his income as Rs.4,500/- p.m., applied
multiplier as 15, deducted 1/4th of the income towards the
personal expenses and awarded compensation under the head
loss of dependency. Considering the facts of the case, Tribunal
in total awarded compensation of Rs.10,82,500/- as under :
1. Loss of dependency Rs.6,07,500/-
2. Loss of consortium Rs.1,00,000/-
3. Loss of filial love and Rs.50,000/-
affection
4. Loss of love and Rs.2,00,000/-
affection
5. Loss of estate Rs.1,00,000/-
6. Transportation of dead Rs.25,000/-
body and funeral
expenses
Total Rs.10,82,500/-
Rounded off to Rs.10,83,000/-
9. Aggrieved by the said judgment and award, both
the claimants as well as Corporation have filed aforesaid
appeals, challenging quantum of compensation awarded.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
10. We have heard arguments of the learned Advocates
for both the sides.
11. Learned Advocate for NWKRTC submits that
claimants were unable to prove the income of the deceased.
The Tribunal has taken notional income of the deceased as
Rs.4,500/-. But according to the chart prepared by the
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority notional income of the
victims of an accident of the year 2008 is Rs.4,250/- p.m.
which needs to be recalculated. He further submits that the
Tribunal has generously awarded compensation under other
heads. The law laid down in the case of National Insurance
Co. Ltd., vs. Pranay Sethi and others1 has not been
followed. Further, the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate
of 9% p.a. Hence, prayed to allow the appeal filed by the
Corporation.
12. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 submits
that respondent No.2 is the first wife of the deceased, which is
admitted by PW-3. Therefore, the said evidence has to be
accepted and on that basis and she should be considered as the
2017 ACJ 2700
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
first wife of the deceased. He further submits that the Tribunal
has considered both the claimant No.1 and respondent No.2 as
wives of Rama and awarded compensation, which is erroneous.
Petitioner No.1 is not the wife of deceased. In Ex.P-41-the
voters list, her real husband's name and surname are
mentioned differently other than her name mentioned. To
claim compensation she is contending that she is wife of
deceased. She is not at all related to the deceased Rama and
not entitled for any amount of compensation.
13. The learned Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 4
further submits that the amount of compensation awarded by
the Tribunal under the head of loss of dependency is meager
which needs to be enhanced. The Tribunal has not considered
future prospects of the deceased. As per the case of Pranay
Sethi (referred supra) 40% of his income has to be added as
future prospects and on that basis, compensation needs to be
recalculated.
14. The learned counsel for claimant No.1-Smt.
Mayawwa, submits that PW3 in her cross-examination submits
that both Mayawwa as well as Lakkawwa are her daughter-in-
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
laws. Said admission is sufficient to believe that claimant No.1
is wife of Rama and she is the first wife. She further submits
that Ex.P8 - the survivor certificate supports her contention
that she is the legally wedded wife of deceased Rama. The
Tribunal considered these facts and rightly awarded the
compensation and apportioned the amount of compensation. It
does not call for any interference. He further submits that the
amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on lower
side which needs to be enhanced.
15. We have gone through the entire materials
available on record. It is not in serious dispute that age of the
deceased was 37 years, which is mentioned in the postmortem
report. The claimants have not produced legally acceptable
evidence to prove that deceased was earning Rs.6,000/- per
month or Rs.4,500/- per month. The Tribunal assessed the
notional income of the deceased as Rs.4,500/- per month,
which appears to be on higher side. The Karnataka Legal
Services Authority has prepared a chart of notional income in
consultation with the stakeholders. According to the said
schedule, notional income of a victim of an accident of the year
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
2008 is Rs.4,250/-, same could be applied to the facts of the
present case.
16. The Tribunal has not considered future prospects of
the deceased. He was aged about 37 years at the time of
accident. Therefore, 40% of his income has to be added
towards future prospects. It is not in dispute that the suitable
multiplier applicable to the facts of this case is 15. Deceased
married person having two children and mother. Therefore,
1/4th of his income has to be deducted towards personal
expenses which is rightly considered by the Tribunal. On the
basis of the above said facts, the compensation under the head
loss of dependency is to be recalculated.
17. The Tribunal has awarded compensation under
conventional heads. They are on higher side. As per the law
laid down in the case of Pranay Sethi (referred supra)
reasonable amount of compensation needs to be awarded
under the conventional heads.
18. Claimant Nos.1 and 2 are contending that they are
wives of the deceased. Without expressing any opinion in this
regard, even if we consider that they are wives, then both of
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
them together are entitled for the compensation under the
head loss of consortium. The other claimants i.e., claimant No.2
and respondent Nos.3 and 4 are mother and children of
deceased respectively and each of them are entitled for loss of
consortium at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per person, as held in
Magma General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram
@ Chuhru Ram and Others2.
19. For the aforesaid discussion, following amount of
compensation is awarded.
1 Loss of dependency 8,03,250/-
(4,250 X 12 X 15 + 40% - ¼)
2 Loss of consortium (Rs.40,000 X 4) Rs.1,60,000/-
3 Loss of estate Rs.15,000/-
4 Loss of funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
Total Rs.9,93,250/-
20. The Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 9%
on the compensation amount per annum which is on higher
side. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the
Corporation and it should be at the rate of 6% per annum.
21. There is serious dispute between claimant Nos.1
and respondent No.2 regarding their marital status with the
(2018) 18 SCC 130
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
deceased Rama. This is summary trial proceedings and in the
said summary trial proceedings, seriously disputed relationship
between the parties cannot be decided. Both of them have to
get it declared from competent Civil Court. Therefore, the
amount of compensation needs to be apportioned in their
favour has to be deposited in the fixed deposit till they settle
the dispute in the Civil Court. It is submitted by the learned
Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 4 that claimant No.1 has
already received the partial compensation from the Tribunal
and she be directed to redeposit the same. Since relationship
of claimant No.1 and respondent No.2 as wife of deceased
Rama is in serious dispute, issue of such direction to both
claimant No.1 and respondent No.2 is necessary. Accordingly,
claimant No.1 as well as respondent No.2 are directed to re-
deposit the part amount of compensation already received by
them before the Tribunal, which shall be kept in the fixed
deposit.
22. For the aforesaid discussion, we pass the following:
ORDER
(i) MFA No.103578/2015, MFA No.102081/2015 and
MFA No.103007/2015 are allowed in part.
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
(ii) The impugned judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal in MVC No.177/2009 dated 13.03.2015 by the
Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court - I & Addl. MACT, Belagavi,
is modified.
(a) The claimants are entitled for the
compensation of Rs.9,93,250/- as against
Rs.10,83,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest
at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of
petition till its realization.
(b) The said amount of compensation is
apportioned in the ratio of 25% each to claimant
No.2 and respondent Nos.3 and 4. Remaining 25%
of compensation shall be payable to legally wedded
wife of Rama, which is in serious dispute in this case,
between claimant No.1 and respondent No.2. The
said amount shall be kept in fixed deposit in the
name of Court, till the said dispute is settled between
the parties on adjudication by the competent Court.
(c) Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are minors. The
amount of compensation awarded to them shall be
kept in fixed deposit till they attain the age of
majority.
(d) Respondent-Corporation shall deposit the
said amount within a period of six weeks from the
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB
C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015,
date of receipt of copy of the award, if it is already
not deposited the same.
(e) Registry is directed to transfer the amount
deposited by the Corporation before this Court, to
the Tribunal forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
NAA, RSH / CT: VP
