Karnataka High Court
Smt. Vijayalaxmi W/O Narayanappa ... vs Nwkrtc, R/By Its Managing Director on 2 July, 2024
Author: S G Pandit
Bench: S G Pandit
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
MFA No. 103922 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 103104 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JULY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S G PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103922 OF 2016 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103104 OF 2017
IN MFA NO.103922 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
1. NWKRTC,
REP. BY MANAGING DIRECTOR,
NWKRTC, HUBBALLI,
2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
NWKRTC HAVERI NEAR RTO OFFICE HAVERI,
TAL. AND DIST: HAVERI,
IN APPEAL REP: BY CHIEF LAW OFFICER,
NWKRTC CENTRAL OFFICE, HUBBALLI.
...APPELLANTS
Digitally signed
by VINAYAKA B V (BY SRI M.K. SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE)
Location: HIGH
COURT OF AND:
KARNATAKA
1. SMT. VIJAYLAXMI W/O. NARAYANAPPA DIVATE,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: MRUTYNJAYA NAGAR, 2ND CROSS,
TAL: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581115.
2. SHRUTI D/O. NARAYANAPPA DIVATE,
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: TAL: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581115.
3. SAGAR S/O. NARAYANAPPA DIVATE,
AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: TAL: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581115.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
MFA No. 103922 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 103104 of 2017
4. SINDHU D/O. NARAYANAPPA DIVATE,
AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: RANEBENNUR, TAL: RANEBENNUR,
DIST: HAVERI-581115.
REPRESENTED NO. 4 BEING MINOR
REPRESENTED BY HER MINOR GUARDIAN
MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SAGAR HEDGE, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI S.R. HEDGE, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3;
R4 MINOR REPTD. BY R1)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 27.08.2016, PASSED IN
MVC.NO.368/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND MEMBER ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL, HAVERI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF
RS.31.22,281/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE
DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSITING OF
COMPENSATION AMOUNT.
IN MFA NO.103104 OF 2017
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. VIJAYLAXMI W/O. NARAYANAPPA DIVATE,
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: MRUTYUNJAYA NAGAR, 2ND CROSS,
TAL: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581115.
2. SHRUTI D/O. NARAYANAPPA DIVATE,
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: MRUTYUNJAYA NAGAR, 2ND CROSS,
TAL. RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581115.
3. SAGAR S/O. NARAYANAPPA DIVATE,
AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: MRUTYUNJAYA NAGAR, 2ND CROSS,
TAL: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581115.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
MFA No. 103922 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 103104 of 2017
4. SINDHU D/O. NARAYANAPPA DIVATE,
AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: MRUTYUNJAYA NAGAR, 2ND CROSS,
TAL. RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581115.
APPELLANT NO.4 IS MINOR AND R/BY
M/G SMT. VIJAYALAXMI DIVATE.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SAGAR HEDGE, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI S.R. HEDGE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NWKRTC,
R/BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
NWKRTC, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI-580020.
2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
NWKRTC, HAVERI, NEAR RTO OFFICE, HAVERI,
TAL. AND DIST: HAVERI-581110.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI M.K. SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R2)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 27.08.2016, PASSED IN
MVC.NO.368/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND MEMBER ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL, HAVERI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS, COMING ON FOR
FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, G BASAVARAJA, J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
MFA No. 103922 of 2016
C/W MFA No. 103104 of 2017
JUDGMENT
The NWKRTC as well as the claimants are in appeals
against judgment and award dated 27.08.2016 passed in
MVC No.368/2013 on the file of learned Prl. Senior Civil
Judge & AMACT., Haveri (for short, 'Tribunal').
2. MFA No.103922/2016 is filed by NWKRTC (for
short, 'Corporation') challenging the liability as well as the
quantum of compensation; whereas MFA No.103104/2017
is filed by the claimants praying for enhancement of
compensation, not being satisfied with the quantum of
compensation granted by the Tribunal.
3. The parties are referred to as per their ranks
before the Tribunal, for the sake of convenience.
4. Brief relevant facts leading to file these appeals
are that, the claimants, who are the wife and children of
the deceased Narayan S/o. Ningappa Divate, filed a claim
petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
seeking compensation for the death of Narayan S/o.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
Ningappa Divate that took place on 09.05.2010 due to
accident that occurred on 02.01.2010 involving KSRTC bus
bearing registration No.KA-27/F-30. It is contended that
after taking treatment at various hospitals, Sri.Narayan
S/o.Ningappa Divate succumbed to injuries on 09.05.2010
at SDM Hospital, Dharwad. It is further stated that prior to
the accident, deceased was hale and healthy person,
working in NWKRTC Depot as Assistant Store Keeper.
5. On issuance of notice, respondents No.1 and 2
appeared before the Tribunal through their counsel and
respondent No.2 filed its statement of objections denying
the entire claim petition averments. It is contended that
even though the accident occurred on 02.01.2010, a false
complaint is filed on 08.01.2010 from the deceased and
the driver of the bus, Sri.S.J.Prasadimath who was not on
duty as on the date of the accident and contends that
death is not due to accidental injuries. Hence, the
Corporation is not liable to pay any compensation and
sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
6. Before the Tribunal, claimant No.1-wife of the
deceased examined herself as PW1 and got marked 75
documents as Exs.P1 to P75; whereas on respondents'
side the driver of the offending bus is examined as RW1
and got marked 8 documents as Exs.R1 and R8. Having
heard the arguments of both the parties and based on the
material placed on record, the Tribunal allowed the claim
petition in part and awarded a total compensation of
Rs.31,22,281/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum
from the date of petition till realization. Being aggrieved
by the same, the Corporation and the claimants are before
this Court in these appeals.
7. Heard Sri.Sagar Hegde, learned counsel
appearing for the appellants/claimants and learned
counsel Sri.M.K.Soudagar for the Corporation and perused
the appeal papers along with original records.
8. Sri.M.K.Soudagar, learned counsel appearing
for the Corporation would submit that the judgment and
award passed by the Tribunal is contrary to law and
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
material on record. He submits that the Tribunal has
totally erred in holding that the deceased sustained the
accidental injuries due to rash and negligent driving of the
bus involved in the accident only on the basis of
postmortem report even though the death was after lapse
of 5 months 7 days from the date of the accident. Learned
counsel would submit that the Tribunal erred in assessing
the income of the deceased at Rs.22,126/- per month as
per the pay slip of the deceased for the month of March,
2010 i.e. Ex.P75 though a sum of Rs.1,087/- came to be
added towards basic pay, DA and HRA and the same was
unpaid. Learned counsel would submit that the Tribunal
has totally erred in adding 50% towards future prospects
of the deceased. Further it is submitted that prior to death
of Sri.Narayan, he had been reimbursed medical bills and
after his death, the Corporation deposited a sum of
Rs.2,99,340/- in W.C/AF/MISC. No.2/2010-11 in F.O.
No.5955540 dated 17.07.2010, but it is not claimed by the
claimants due to rival claims. On all these grounds, he
prays to allow the appeal filed by the Corporation.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
9. Per contra, Sri.Sagar Hegde, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the claimants would submit that
the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is
contrary to the material placed on record. Learned counsel
would further submit that the Tribunal committed error in
awarding meager compensation under the heads of
medical expenses and funeral expenses. He submits that
the deceased was admitted in the hospital due to
accidental injuries as an indoor patient for a period of 5
months and has spent more than Rs.7,00,000/- for his
medical expenses, whereas the claimants have spent more
than Rs.25,000/- for transportation of dead body, funeral
expenses and on other heads. Thus, he prays for allowing
the appeal filed by the claimants.
10. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and on perusal of the appeal papers along with original
records, the following points would arise for consideration:
a) Whether the Tribunal is justified in holding
that the accident occurred due to rash and
negligent act on the part of the driver of
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
KSRTC bus bearing Registration No.KA-
27/F-30 causing death of Sri.Narayan
S/o.Nagappa Divate?
b) Whether the claimants are entitled for
enhanced compensation?
c) Whether the Tribunal is justified in adding
50% towards future prospects of the
deceased?
d) What order?
Our answer to the above points are as under:
Point No.(a) - Affirmative
Point No.(b) - Partly affirmative
Point No.(c) - Partly affirmative
Point No.(d) - As per final order for the following
reasons:
11. Point No.(a): - We have carefully examined
material placed on record before this Court. The claimant
No.1 being the wife of the deceased Narayan S/o.Nagappa
Divate has reiterated the averments made in the claim
petition and produced the documents at Exs.P1 to P75.
The respondents have contended that false chargesheet is
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
filed against the driver of KSRTC bus bearing registration
No.KA-27/F-30. To substantiate the same, the driver
Sri.S.J.Prasadimath is examined as RW1 and he has
deposed that he is not responsible for this accident and he
is acquitted in CC.No.202/2010 as per the judgment at
Ex.R5.
12. As could be seen from the material placed on
record by the claimants that on the basis of the complaint
filed by the Narayan, Haveri Town Police have registered
the case in FIR No.5/2010 for the commission of offence
punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC and Section
134(a)(b) read with Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act
against the driver of KSRTC bus bearing registration
No.KA-27/F-30 and submitted the FIR to the Court.
Thereafter, the Police rushed to spot, conducted spot
panchanama, seizure panchanama, inquest panchanama
in the presence of Panchas, obtained PM Report, MV
Report and recorded statement of witnesses. On thorough
investigation, IO has submitted the chargesheet against
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
the driver of the offending bus for the commission of
offence punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and
304A of IPC and under Section 134(a)(b) read with
Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
13. The accident occurred on 02.01.2010 and while
taking treatment, Sri.Narayan Divate died due to
accidental injuries on 09.05.2010. The PM Report at Ex.P7
reveals that the cause of death is due to pelvic injuries
and its complications and the same is not disputed by the
other side.
14. PW1 has clearly deposed in her evidence that
after the accident, her husband was shifted to Government
Hospital at Haveri, thereafter he was referred to further
treatment to KIMS Hospital, Hubballi, thereafter shifted to
Bapuji Hospital, Davanagere and from their shifted to
Kasturaba Hospital, Manipal and finally he was shifted to
SDM Hospital, Dharwad on 30.04.2010 where he
succumbed to the injuries during treatment on
09.05.2010. During the course of cross-examination of
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
PW1, the Corporation has not denied this aspect. The
chargesheet submitted by the concerned Police is also not
been questioned by the Corporation. Considering the
evidence placed before the Tribunal, the Tribunal has
rightly come to the conclusion that the deceased sustained
injuries due to rash and negligent act on the part of the
driver of KSRTC bus and died due to accidental injuries
during treatment.
15. On re-appreciation, re-examination and
re-consideration of the entire evidence on record, we do
not find any error/legal infirmity in the finding given by the
Tribunal. Accordingly, we answer Point No.1 in the
affirmative.
16. Point No.(b) :- With regard to quantum of
compensation is concerned, the Tribunal has assessed the
income of the deceased as per the pay slip-Ex.P75 at
Rs.22,126/- per month which is just and proper.
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
17. Since there are four 4 dependants, the Tribunal
has rightly deducted 1/4th towards personal and living
expenses of the deceased. Multiplier of 11 applied by the
Tribunal is also just and proper since the deceased was
aged 51 years.
18. Point No.(c) :- With regard to future prospects
of the deceased is concerned, the Tribunal has added 50%
to the assessed income of the deceased which is not in
consonance with the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs.
Pranay Sethi & Others1. The age of the deceased was
51 years as on the date of the accident as shown in the
claim petition itself. Hence, in view of the above said
decision, the claimants are entitled to addition of 15%
towards future prospects of the deceased. Thus, the
claimants would be entitled for modified compensation on
the head of loss of dependency as under:
2017 (16) SCC 680
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
Rs.22,126 (income) x 12 (months) + 15%(future prospects) x
11(multiplier) x 3/4(deduction) = Rs.25,19,045/-
19. Further, in terms of decision of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance
Company Ltd., Vs. Nanu Ram and Others2 each of the
claimants would be entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards loss
of consortium, besides Rs.15,000/- towards loss of
estate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses.
20. Insofar as the award of compensation under the
head of medical expenses is concerned, the same is
unaltered.
21. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for
modified compensation on the following heads:
Sl. Particulars Amount
No. (In Rupees)
1. Loss of dependency 25,19,045/-
2. Loss of estate & Funeral expenses 30,000/-
3. Loss of consortium (Rs.40000x4) 1,60,000/-
4. Medical expenses 1,25,140/-
Total Rs.28,34,185/-
2018 ACJ 2782
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
22. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to total
compensation of Rs.28,34,185/- as against
Rs.31,22,281/- awarded by the Tribunal.
23. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Corporation would submit that the Corporation has
deposited a sum of Rs.2,99,340/- in W.C/AF/MISC.
No.2/2010-11 in F.O. No.5955540 dated 17.07.2010 and
requests this Court to pass an order to permit the
Corporation to receive the said amount deposited by the
Corporation. Other side has not objected in this regard.
Thus, the Corporation is permitted to withdraw the said
amount from the concerned authority.
24. Hence, we pass the following:
ORDER
a) Both appeals are allowed in part.
b) The impugned judgment & award of
Tribunal is modified holding that the
claimants are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.28,34,185/- as
against Rs.31,22,281/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:9018-DB
c) The compensation amount shall carry
interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the
date of claim petition till realization.
d) The respondent No.2-Corporation shall
deposit the 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) Apportionment, deposit & disbursement
shall be made as per award of Tribunal.
f) The amount in deposit, if any, be
transmitted to the concerned Tribunal
forthwith along with original records.
g) The Corporation is permitted to withdraw
the amount of Rs.2,99,340/- in
W.C/AF/MISC. No.2/2010-11 in F.O.
No.5955540 dated 17.07.2010 from the
concerned authority.
h) Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
RH
