Karnataka High Court
Laxman S/O Basappa Agadi vs The Managing Director on 29 February, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4686
MFA No. 102781 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102781 OF 2014 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SHRI. LAXMAN S/O. BASAPPA AGADI,
AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE COOLIE,
R/O. JINNUR, TQ: KALAGHATIGI, DIST: DHARWAD.
2. SMT. SHANKARAVVA W/O. LAXMAN AGADI,
AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. JINNUR, TQ: KALAGHATIGI,
DISTRICT: DHARWAD.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. H. M. DHARIGOND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, NWKRTC,
CENTRAL OFFICE, GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI.
2. THE SELF INSURANCE FUND, NWKRTC,
CENTRAL OFFICE, GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI.
Digitally
signed by
ROHAN
ROHAN
HADIMANI 3. SALEEM S/O. AKBARALI SOMANAKOPPA,
HADIMANI T
T Date:
2024.03.01
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: KSRTC, DRIVER,
11:36:30
+0530 R/O. KIRAVATTI, TQ: YELLAPUR, DIST: KARWAR.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ABHISHEK FOR
SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2,
NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NO.3 SERVED)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF
THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 08-03-2011 PASSED IN
MVC NO.301/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE FAST TRACK COURT-II,
DHARWAD, SITTING AT: HUBLI AND AWARD JUST AND REASONABLE
COMPENSATION UNDER THE ALL PERMISSABLE HEADS IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4686
MFA No. 102781 of 2014
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the
consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for
final disposal.
2. This appeal is by the claimants seeking
enhancement of compensation awarded under judgment &
award dated 08.03.2011 passed in MVC No.301/2010 by the
Presiding Officer, FTC-II, Dharwad, sitting at Hubli (for short,
'Tribunal').
3. Brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on
21.10.2009, one Basavaraj was proceeding on motorcycle
bearing registration No.KA-25/Y-6004 as a pillion rider from
Gokul side to Hosur, Hubli. At that time, KSRTC bus bearing
registration No.KA-01/F-1241 came in a rash and negligent
manner and dashed against the motorcycle. Due to which, both
rider and pillion rider fell down, rear right wheel of the bus ran
over the head of Basavaraj and he sustained injuries and
succumbed to the same at the spot. It is averred that the
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4686
deceased Basavaraj was aged about 19 years, was doing coolie
work and earning Rs.6,000/- per month.
4. Before the Tribunal, Respondent/Corporation
contested the proceedings by filing statement of objections and
denied the averments made in the claim petition. It is further
contended that the driver of the offending bus was driving the
same in a moderate speed, but the rider of motorcycle was
riding the same in a rash and negligent manner and caused the
accident. Hence, sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
5. The claimant No.1, father of the deceased
Basavaraj, examined himself as PW1 and got marked the
documents as Ex.P1 to P5. The respondent/Corporation
examined its driver as RW1, but not marked any document.
6. The Tribunal on appreciation of entire material
available on record, allowed the claim petition in part awarding
total compensation of Rs.2,77,000/- with interest at 6% per
annum from the date of petition till realization. The claimants
being aggrieved by quantum of compensation, are before this
Court in this appeal.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4686
7. Learned counsel Sri.H.M.Dharigond for the
appellants/claimants would submit that the Tribunal committed
an error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/-
per month, which is on the lower side, as the deceased was
doing coolie work and earning Rs.6,000/- per month. He further
submits that no compensation has been awarded by the
Tribunal under the head of loss of future prospects, which the
claimants would be entitled to 40% of the assessed income in
terms of decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National
Insurance Company Limited Vs.Pranay Sethi & Others1.
He would submit that the Tribunal also committed an error in
applying multiplier of 14 taking the age of the deceased as 44
years, as the deceased was bachelor and aged abut 19 years at
the time of the accident. The award of compensation by the
Tribunal under the conventional heads is also on the lesser
side, which requires to be enhanced appropriately. Thus, he
prays for allowing the appeal.
8. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.S.S.Koliwad for
respondent/Corporation supporting the impugned judgment
and award of the Tribunal would submit that in the absence of
2017(16) SCC 680
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4686
cogent and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has rightly
assessed monthly income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/-, which
is just and proper and needs no interference. He further
submits that award of compensation by the Tribunal on all
heads is just and proper, does not call for interference. Thus,
he prays for dismissal of the appeal.
9. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and on perusal of the appeal papers including the Tribunal
records, the only point that would arise of consideration in this
appeal is, whether the appellants would be entitled for
enhanced compensation?
10. Answer to the above point would be in the
'affirmative' for the following reasons:
11. The parties to the proceedings do not dispute the
occurrence of the accident on 21.10.2009 resulting in death of
Basavaraj. The contention of learned counsel for the appellants
is that the Tribunal committed an error in assessing the income
of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month, as the deceased was
doing coolie work and earning Rs.6,000/- per month. No
document is placed on record by the claimants to establish the
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4686
income of the deceased. Therefore, it would be just and
appropriate to assess income of the deceased notionally, taking
note of income chart prepared by the KSLSA. As per the chart,
the notional income for the year 2009 is Rs.5,000/- per month,
this Court assesses notional income of the deceased at
Rs.5,000/- per month. Further, the Tribunal committed an
error in not awarding compensation under the head of loss of
future prospects. In terms of decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of Pranay Sethi referred supra, wherever the
deceased is aged below 40 years, the claimants would be
entitled for addition of 40% of the assessed income towards
loss of future prospects of the deceased. In the instant case,
as per Ex.P3-PM report, the age of the deceased was 19 years
as on the date of the accident, hence, the claimants would be
entitled for addition of 40% of the assessed income towards
loss of future prospects of the deceased. There is no dispute
with regard to deduction of 50% towards personal and living
expenses of the deceased, as the deceased was a bachelor. The
proper multiplier applicable to the age of the deceased is 18.
Thus, the claimants would be entitled for modified
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4686
compensation on the head of loss of dependency at
Rs.7,56,000/- (Rs.5,000+40%x12x18x50%).
12. The Tribunal also committed an error in awarding
Rs.10,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.5,000/- towards
funeral expenses, which are on the lower side. In light of
decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case referred
supra, the claimants would be entitled to Rs.16,500/- towards
loss of estate and Rs.16,500/- towards funeral expenses
including 10% escalation. In terms of decision of Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Nanu Ram & Others2, appellant No.1 and 2
would be entitled to Rs.44,000/- each towards filial
consortium respectively including 10% escalation.
13. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to modified
compensation on the following heads:
Particulars Amount
(in Rs.)
Loss of dependency 7,56,000/-
Loss of estate 16,500/-
Funeral expenses 16,500/-
Loss of consortium 88,000/-
Total 8,77,000/-
2018 ACJ 2782
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4686
14. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to total
compensation of Rs.8,77,000/- as against Rs.2,77,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
15. It is noticed that this Court vide order dated
20.8.2016, while condoning the delay of 1239 days in filing the
appeal, made an observation that the appellants/claimants
would not be entitled for interest for the delayed period, in case
if they succeed in the appeal. Hence, the claimants would not
be entitled for the interest on the enhanced compensation for
the delayed period.
16. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER
a) Appeal stands allowed in part.
b) The impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal is modified to an extent that the
claimants would be entitled to total
compensation of Rs.8,77,000/- as against
Rs.2,77,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
c) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the
date of petition till the date of payment.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:4686
d) The Corporation shall deposit the enhanced
compensation amount with accrued interest
before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of certified copy of this
judgment.
e) Needless to say that the claimants would not be
entitled to interest on the enhanced
compensation amount for the aforesaid delayed
period. Registry to take note of the same while
drawing award.
f) The apportionment, deposit and disbursement
of enhanced compensation shall be made as per
award of the Tribunal.
g) Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
JTR
