Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Controller vs Mallesh And Ors on 1 July, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
MFA No. 200795 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200751 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
MFA NO. 200795 OF 2020 (MV-D)
C/W
MFA NO. 200751 OF 2021 (MV-D)
IN. M.F.A NO.200795 OF 2020:
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
N.E.K.R.T.C DIVISIFONAL OFFICE, RAICHUR,
NOW THROUGH ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER NEKRTC,
CENTRAL OFFICE, SARIGE SADAHANA,
MAIN ROAD, KALABURAGI.
Digitally signed by
BASALINGAPPA ...APPELLANT
SHIVARAJ
DHUTTARGAON
Location: HIGH (BY SRI. SHARANABASAPPA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. MALLESH S/O RANGAPPA
AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE.
2. KUMARI. BHARGAVI D/O MALLESH
AGE: 07 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
RESPONDENT NO.1 MALLESH BOTH ARE
R/O L.B.S. NAGAR, RAICHUR- 585401.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
MFA No. 200795 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200751 of 2021
3. ARUNKUMAR S/O BANDU CHAVAN
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: DRIVER OF NEKSRTC BUS
NO.KA-36/F-1325, R/O JALAVADA,
TQ: SINDHAGI, DISTRICT: VIJAYAPUR- 586101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHARANAGOUDA V. PATIL, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2;
NOTICE TO R3 SERVED.
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
PRAYING TO MODIFY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND SET
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 06.03.2020 AND AWARD DATED
11.03.2020 IN MVC NO.370/2019 IN THE COURT OF II ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND M.A.C.T AT RAICHUR.
IN. M.F.A NO.200751 OF 2021:
BETWEEN:
1. MALLESH S/O RANGAPPA
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE.
2. KUMARI. BHARGAVI D/O MALLESH
AGE: 06 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER
RESPONDENT NO.1 MALLESH
BOTH ARE R/O L.B.S. NAGAR, RAICHUR.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SHARANAGOUDA V. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. ARUNKUMAR S/O BANDU CHAVAN
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: DRIVER OF NEKSRTC,
BEARING NO.KA-36/F-1325, R/O JALAVADA,
TQ: SINDHAGI, DISTRICT: VIJAYAPUR- 586101.
2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
NEKRTC, DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
RAICHUR- 584 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHARANABASAPPA M. PATIL, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
MFA No. 200795 of 2020
C/W MFA No. 200751 of 2021
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY MODIFY THE JUDGMENT
AND AWARD DATED 06.03.2020, PASSED BY THE MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL II-ADDL DIST. JUDGE AT
RAICHUR, IN MVC.NO.370/2018, AND ENHANCE THE AWARD
COMPENSATION OF RS.13,56,700/-, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY ASHOK S. KINAGI J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
These two appeals are filed under Section 173(1) of
Motor Vehicles Act, (for short, hereinafter referred to as
'the Act') and the same are arising out of the judgment
and award dated 06.03.2020 passed in MVC No.370/2019
by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge & MACT,
Raichur.
2. Parties are referred to as per their ranking
before the Tribunal.
3. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award
dated 06.03.2020 passed in MVC No.370/2019, the
respondent-Corporation has filed the appeal in MFA
No.200795/2020, challenging the liability and the
petitioners being dissatisfied with the compensation award
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
by the tribunal and have filed the appeal in MFA
No.200751/2021 seeking enhancement of compensation.
4. Facts giving rise to filing of these appeals are as
under:
On 06.08.2019 at about 6.30 p.m., the deceased
Smt. Jayalaxmi @ Jayamma along with one Sujatha was
returning after attending coolie work in a NEKRTC bus
bearing registration No.KA-36/F-1325, which was driven
by respondent No.1 and when the bus was in front of
S.P.Office, Raichur, at that time, the respondent No.1 took
the bus from left direction to right direction in a rash and
negligent manner and due to his negligence the deceased
Smt.Jayalaxmi @ Jayamma fell down from the door of bus
and sustained multiple grievous injuries and she was
shifted to Government Hospital, Raichur and succumbed to
the injuries while undergoing treatment. The petitioners
being the legal representatives of deceased have filed the
claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act
seeking for compensation of Rs.29,50,000/- with interest
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
at 8% per annum on account of death of Smt.Jayalaxmi in
a road traffic accident.
5. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 appeared through their
counsel and filed the written statement denying the
averments made in the claim petition and prayed to
dismiss the claim petition.
6. The Tribunal on the basis of pleadings of the
parties framed the issues. The petitioners in order to prove
their claim, examined petitioner No.1 as PW.1 and got
marked 6 documents as per Exs.P1 to P6. On the other
hand, respondent No.2 got examined himself as RW.1 and
the conductor of the offending bus was examined as RW.2
and got marked documents as per Ex.R1 and Ex.R2.
7. The Tribunal after recording the evidence,
hearing on both sides and on the assessment of oral and
documentary evidence answered issued No.1 in the
affirmative, issue No.2 partly affirmative and issue No.3 as
per final order. The tribunal allowed the claim petition in
part with costs and directed the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
pay compensation of Rs.15,93,300/- along with interest at
the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till its
deposit and directed respondent No.2 to deposit
compensation amount within two months from the date of
award.
8. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment and
award passed by the tribunal, respondent No.2-
Corporation has filed MFA No.200795/2020 challenging the
liability and the petitioners have filed MFA
No.200751/2021 seeking enhancement of compensation.
9. Heard the learned counsel for the respondent-
Corporation and learned counsel for the petitioners.
10. Learned counsel for respondent No.2-
Corporation submits that the tribunal committed an error
in fastening the liability on respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly.
It is contended that the deceased fell down from the bus
and there was negligence on the part of the deceased.
Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
filed by the respondent-Corporation and prays to dismiss
the appeal filed by the petitioners.
11. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is
on the lower side. He also submits that there was
negligence on the part of the driver of the offending bus.
He submits that the offending bus being city bus having
two doors and driver of the bus did not close the doors of
the bus as both the doors were hydraulic and system was
not functioning for the last 3 to 4 years and the driver of
the bus all of a sudden has taken from left direction to
right direction in a rash and negligent manner and caused
accident. Immediately, the deceased Jayalaxmi @
Jayamma fell down from the bus and sustained multiple
injuries and succumbed to the injuries. He also submits
that a criminal case was registered against respondent
No.1 and charge sheet was also filed. Hence, on these
grounds, he prays to allow the appeal filed by the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
petitioners and dismiss the appeal filed by the respondent-
Corporation.
12. Perused the records and considered the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
The points that would arise for our consideration are with
regard to liability and quantum of compensation.
13. Insofar as liability is concerned:- It is not in
dispute that on 06.08.2019 the deceased Jayalaxmi @
Jayamma was traveling in a bus bearing registration
No.KA-36/F-1325, which was driven by respondent No.1.
The driver of the bus all of a sudden has taken from left
direction to right direction in a rash and negligent manner
and due to his negligence, the deceased fell down from the
bus and sustained multiple injuries and succumbed to the
injuries. RW.1 being the driver of the bus in the cross-
examination it is elicited that the offending bus being the
city bus was having two doors and both the doors were
hydraulic and system was not functioning for the last 3 to
4 years. From the said admission, it is clear that the bus
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
being used by keeping open doors thereby exposing the
passengers of the bus to the risk of injury and death. In
order to establish that, the accident was occurred due to
rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending
vehicle, the petitioners have produced the certified copy of
FIR and charge sheet which are marked as Ex.P1 and P6,
which discloses that accident was occurred due to rash
and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle
who had got two doors open and immediately he has
taken the bus from left direction to right direction and
caused accident. The tribunal placing the reliance on the
admission of RWs.1 and 2 and copy of FIR and charge
sheet, has rightly held that the accident was occurred due
to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending
vehicle i.e. respondent No.1 and rightly exonerated liability
on respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally. Hence, in
view of the above, we do not find any error in the
impugned judgment, insofar as exonerating the liability.
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
Quantum of compensation:
14. It is the case of the petitioners that, deceased
Jayalaxmi @ Jayamma was doing labour work and earning
Rs.12,000/- per month and contributing the same towards
family welfare. Due to sudden death of the deceased-
Jayalaxmi @ Jayamma, the petitioners were put to
starvation. In order to establish monthly income of the
deceased, the petitioners have not produced any record to
prove the income of the deceased. In the absence of proof
of income, the notional income of the deceased has to be
assessed as per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka
State Legal Service Authority. The accident is of the year
2017. We assess the notional income at Rs.13,250/- per
month. To the aforesaid amount, as the deceased was
aged 28 years, 40% of the said amount has to be added
on account of future prospects in view of the law laid down
by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the
case of National Insurance Company Limited vs.
Pranay Sethi and Others reported in AIR 2017 SC
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
5157. Thus, the monthly income comes to Rs.18,550/-.
There are two petitioners. Considering that there are 2
dependents, we deem it appropriate to deduct 1/3rd of the
said income towards personal expenses of the deceased
and therefore, the monthly income of the deceased comes
to Rs.12,367/- Taking into account the age of the
deceased which was 28 years at the time of accident,
multiplier of '17' has to be adopted as per the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma
vs. Delhi Transport Corporation reported in (2009) 6
SCC 121. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled to a sum
of Rs.25,22,868/- (Rs.12,367/- x 12 x 17) on account of
loss of dependency.
15. Further, in view of the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General
Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram Alias
Chuhru Ram & Others reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130,
each petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs.44,000/- towards
loss of consortium. The petitioners are two in numbers,
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
hence, the compensation towards loss of consortium would
be Rs.88,000/- (44,000 x 2).
16. In addition, the petitioners/appellants are
entitled a sum of Rs.16,500/- towards funeral expenses
and Rs.16,500/- under the head of loss of estate.
17. Thus, in all, the petitioners are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.26,43,868/- as against Rs.15,93,300/-
awarded by the Tribunal. The petitioners are entitled for
enhanced compensation of Rs.10,50,568/-.
18. In view of the above discussion, we proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
i. The appeal filed by the respondent-
Corporation in MFA No.200795/2020 is
dismissed.
ii. The appeal filed by the petitioners in MFA
No.200751/2021 is allowed in part.
iii. The impugned judgment and award
passed by the Tribunal is modified.
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4423-DB
iv. The petitioners are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.26,43,868/- as
against Rs.15,93,300/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
v. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to
enhanced compensation of Rs.10,50,568/-
along with interest at the rate of 6% per
annum from the date of petition till the
date of realization.
vi. Respondent No.2/Corporation is directed
to deposit the compensation amount
before the Tribunal within a period of
eight weeks from date of the receipt of
certified copy of this judgment.
vii. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be
transmitted along with trial Court records
to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
MSR
CT;BN
