Karnataka High Court
Sri C Shivaraj vs The Managing Director on 10 June, 2024
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:20090
MFA No. 5072 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. 5072 OF 2021 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI C SHIVARAJ
S/O CHELUVAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS,
2. SMT B J BHAGAYALAKSHMI
S/O C SHIVARAJ,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
BOTH ARE R/AT NO.253,
GROUND FLOOR,
14TH MAIN, 21ST CROSS,
PIPELINE ROAD,
KUMARASWAMY LAYOUT, 2ND STAGE,
BANGALORE-560078.
...APPELLANTS
Digitally (BY SRI. SUDHAKAR REDDY S V.,ADVOCATE)
signed by
BHARATHI S
Location: AND:
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
TAMIL NADU
STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION
(VILLUPURAM) LTD.,
NO.3/137, TRICHY MAIN ROAD,
SALAMEDU, VILLUPURAM,
TAMIL NADU 605602
ALSO AT:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
TAMIL NADU STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION
(VILLUPURAM) LTD.,
SATELLITE BUS STAND,
MYSORE ROAD,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:20090
MFA No. 5072 of 2021
BANGALORE-560026.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. BOPANNA B., ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.04.2021 PASSED IN MVC
NO.3308/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL SMALL
CAUSES JUDGE, ACMM AND MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, 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 12.04.2021 passed in MVC No.3308/2019
by the XXI Additional Judge of Small Causes Court and
ACMM, Bengaluru2.
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.
Hereinafter referred to as the 'Act's
Hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal'
NC: 2024:KHC:20090
4. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly
stated are that on 15.05.2019 at about 4.15 p.m. when
the deceased was driving Honda Activa Scooter bearing
Registration No.KA-05-KF-6862 on BGS flyover towards
Mysuru on Mysuru Road, at that time, a TNSTC bus
bearing registration No.TN-21-N-1915 driven by its driver
came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against
the Honda Activa Scooter which was driven by the
deceased. As a result of the accident, the deceased
sustained grievous multiple injuries and 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 their son who died in the
road traffic accident. It is stated by the petitioners that
the deceased was earning `15,000/- per month and also
pursuing his studies in National Evening College,
Bengaluru. Due to death of their son in the road traffic
accident, they lost their son and their livelihood. Hence,
they filed the claim petition seeking compensation along
with interest.
NC: 2024:KHC:20090
5. On service of summons, the 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 the petitioners prove that they
are the only legal representatives of
deceased 'Jagadish' and were dependent on
him?
2. Whether the petitioners further prove that
the deceased succumbed to the injuries
sustained in a motor vehicle accident that
occurred on 15.5.2019 at about 4.15 p.m.
near K.R. Market complex, Mysore road, BGS
Fly over, Bengaluru City, due to the
actionable negligence of the driver of TNSTC
bus bearing Reg. No.TN-21-N-1915?
3. Whether the petitioners are entitled for
compensation? If so, what is the quantum
and from whom?
4. What order or award?
7. In order to prove their case, claimant/petitioner No.1
examined himself as PW.1 and eye witness to the incident was
examined as PW.2. Exs.P1 to Ex.P12 were marked in evidence.
Respondent was examined as RW.1. No documents were
NC: 2024:KHC:20090
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 `16,22,000/- along with interest at the
rate of 9% p.a. and directed the respondent to deposit the
compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved
by the quantum of compensation, the claimants filed this
appeal for enhancement of compensation.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners/claimants
contended that the deceased was earning `15,000/- per
month and produced the salary certificate but unable to
examine the employer. Even otherwise, the Court could
have taken the notional income of `14,000/- as per the
Lok-Adalath chart and prays for enhancement of
compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC:20090
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.
11. The point that arises for consideration is;
i) Whether the petitioners are entitled for
enhancement of compensation, if so, what
judgment/award?
12. Having perused the records, the accident is not in
dispute. The Respondent has not filed any appeal. The
claimants claim that deceased was earning `15,000/- per
month. But the Tribunal has taken the monthly income of
the deceased as `10,000/- which is not correct. The
petitioners have produced the documents to show that the
deceased was earning `15,000/- per month. However,
they have not examined the employer and failed to prove
the income of the deceased. Hence, the notional income
has to be assessed. As per the guidelines issued by the
NC: 2024:KHC:20090
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, for the accident
taken place in the year 2019, the notional income of the
deceased has to be taken at `14,000/- p.m. To the
aforesaid income, 40% has to be added on account of
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 `19,600/-. Since the deceased was a bachelor,
50% of his income shall be deducted towards his personal
expenses. Hence, the notional income of the deceased
comes to `9,800/- The deceased was aged about 19 years
at the time of the accident and multiplier applicable to his
age group is '18'. Thus, the claimants are entitled to
compensation of `21,16,800/- (`9,800*12*18) on account
of 'loss of dependency'.
13. As regards, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal towards love and affection, funeral expenses and
(2017) 16 SCC 680
NC: 2024:KHC:20090
Transportation, loss of Estate the Tribunal are just and
proper and the same need not be interfered with.
14. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following
compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 21,16,800.00
Loss of love and filial 80,000.00
affection
Funeral expenses & 15,000.00
Transportation
Loss of Estate 15,000.00
Total 22,26,800.00
15. 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 `22,26,800/-
NC: 2024:KHC:20090
as against `16,22,000/- awarded by
the Tribunal.
iv) The Respondent is 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 six weeks from the date of
receipt of copy of this judgment.
v) The apportionment, deposit and
release of amount shall be made in
terms of the award of the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BS
