Karnataka High Court
Smt Yallamma vs Karegouda on 10 June, 2024
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:20089
MFA No. 5402 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5402 OF 2021 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT YALLAMMA
W/O RAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
OCC HOUSEHOLD WORK,
2. R DEEPA
D/O RAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
3. SMT GOURAMMA
W/O BASAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS,
ALL ARE R/O DOOR NO.758/5,
2ND MAIN, 12TH CROSS,
Digitally KTJ NAGARA,
signed by DAVANAGERE-577002
BHARATHI S
Location:
...APPELLANTS
HIGH COURT (BY SRI. SREE HARSHA A K.,ADVOCATE)
OF
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. KAREGOUDA
S/O D HANUMANTHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
DRIVER OF KSRTC BUS
BEARING REG NO.-17/F-1433
R/O BANNIKODU VILLAGE,
HARIHARA TALUK,
DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577516
2. MANAGING DIRECTOR
KSRTC BANGALORE,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:20089
MFA No. 5402 of 2021
REP BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
KSRTC DAVANAGERE DIVISION,
OWNER OF KSRTC BUS BEARING
REG NO.KA-17/F-1433
DAVANAGERE-577002
3. THE CHAIRMAN
KSRTC INTERNAL SECURITY FUND,
SARIGE BHAVAN,
SHANTHINAGAR, K H ROAD,
BANGALORE-560002
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K. NAGARAJ., ADVOCATE FOR R2
R2 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD 25.4.2024)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.21.03.2020 PASSED IN MVC
NO.259/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, JMFC, VI MACT, DAVANGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. The above appeal is filed by the claimants under
Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 19881 for
enhancement of compensation challenging the judgment
and award dated 21.03.2020 passed in MVC No.259/2019
Hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'
NC: 2024:KHC:20089
by the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge & VI MACT.,
Davanagere2.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are
referred as per their rank before the Tribunal.
4. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly
stated are that on 30.10.2018 at about 10.00 a.m. when
the deceased was going along with his friend in
motorcycle between Kaidala Cross, Kokkuwada Village,
the driver of the KSRTC bus bearing No.KA-17/F-1433
driven by its driver came in a rash and negligent manner
and dashed against the deceased motorcycle. As a result
of the accident, the deceased succumbed to the injuries on
the spot. Hence, the petitioners filed the claim petition
under Section 166 of the Act claiming compensation for
the death of the deceased who died in the road traffic
accident. It is stated by the petitioners that the deceased
Hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'
NC: 2024:KHC:20089
was earning `20,000/- per month by doing plumber work.
Petitioners being the mother, grand mother and sister
have sustained loss of estate, love and affection and
dependency. Hence, they filed the claim petition seeking
compensation along with interest.
5. On service of summons, the respondent Nos. 1 and 3
did not appeared. Respondent No.2 appeared through
counsel and filed written statement denying the averments
made in the claim petition and prayed for dismissal of the
claim petition.
6. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the
Tribunal framed the following issues:
i. Whether petitioners prove that on
30.10.2018 at about 10.10 AM while
deceased Sharath was going along with his
friend Ashwik in his motorcycle between
Kaidala Cross and Kukkavada Village road,
the driver of KSRTC Bus bearing No.KA-
17/F-1433 drove the vehicle in a rash and
negligent manner and hit against the
motorcycle, as a result he fell down and
succumbed to death?
ii. Whether the petitioner is entitled for
compensation? If so from whom and to what
extent?
NC: 2024:KHC:20089
iii. What order or award?
7. In order to prove their case, claimant/petitioner No.1
examined herself as PW.1 and got marked Exs.P1 to Ex.P5.
On the other hand, the drive of KSRTC Bus examined as RW.1.
Exs.R1 to R3 were marked in evidence. The Tribunal, by the
impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took
place on account of rash and negligent driving of the
offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which, the
deceased sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries.
The Tribunal further held that the claimants are entitled to
a compensation of `9,34,000/-. Since the 2nd Respondent
has produced receipts for having paid interim
compensation of `50,000/- to the petitioners, the Tribunal
has granted `8,84,000 along with interest at the rate of
9% p.a. after deducting `50,000/- which was paid to the
claimants as interim compensation and directed the
respondent Nos.2 and 3 to deposit the compensation
amount along with interest. Being aggrieved by the
quantum of compensation, the claimants filed this appeal
for enhancement of compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC:20089
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners/claimants
contended that the deceased was earning `20,000/- per
month by doing plumber work. But she has not produced
any documents to show the income of the deceased.
Hence, the Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the
deceased as `9,000/- which is not correct and also
contended that the future prospects also not considered by
the Tribunal. Hence, seeks for enhancement of
compensation.
9. Learned counsel for Respondent supported the
judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and prayed
for dismissal of the appeal.
10. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the material available on record, the point that
arises for consideration is;
i) Whether the petitioners are entitled for
enhancement of compensation, if so, what
judgment/award?
NC: 2024:KHC:20089
11. Having perused the records, the accident is not in
dispute. The Respondents have not filed any appeal. The
claimants claim that deceased was earning `20,000/- per
month. But they have not produced any document to
support the income. Hence, the Tribunal has taken the
monthly income of the deceased as `9,000/- which is not
correct. Hence, the notional income has to be re-
assessed. As per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka
State Legal Services Authority, for the accident taken
place in the year 2018, the notional income of the
deceased has to be taken at `12,500/- p.m. To the
aforesaid income, 40% has to be added towards 'future
prospects' in view of the law laid down by the Constitution
Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in NATIONAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED -V- PRANAY SETHI &
OTHERS3. Thus, the monthly income comes to `17,500/-.
Since the deceased was a bachelor, 50% of his income
shall be deducted towards his personal expenses. Hence,
(2017) 16 SCC 680
NC: 2024:KHC:20089
the notional income of the deceased comes to `8,750/-.
The deceased was aged about 22 years at the time of the
accident and multiplier applicable to his age group is '18'.
Thus, the claimants are entitled to compensation of
`18,90,000/- (`8,750x12x18) on account of 'loss of
dependency'.
12. As regards, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal towards loss of Estate, loss of consortium, funeral
expenses are just and proper and the same need not be
interfered with.
13. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following
compensation:
Compensation under Amount in (Rs.)
different Heads
Loss of dependency 18,90,000.00
Loss of estate 15,000.00
Loss of Consortium 40,000.00
Funeral expenses 15,000.00
Total 19,60,000.00
NC: 2024:KHC:20089
14. In the result, the following order is passed:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part.
ii) The judgment of the Tribunal is
modified.
iii) The claimants are entitled to a
total compensation of `19,60,000/-
as against `9,34,000/- awarded by
the Tribunal. Since the 2nd
Respondent has produced receipts
for having paid the interim
compensation of `50,000/- to the
petitioners, the claimants are
entitled for a total compensation of
`19,10,000/-.
v) The Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are
directed to deposit the compensation
amount along with interest at 6%
p.a. on the enhanced compensation
from the date of filing of the claim
petition till the date of realization,
within a period of 60 days from the
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:20089
date of receipt of copy of this
judgment.
vi) The apportionment, deposit and
release of amount shall be made in
terms of the award of the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BS
