Karnataka High Court
Devendra And Ors vs The Secretary Msrtc on 5 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8100
MFA No. 202587 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202587 OF 2019 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. DEVENDRA
S/O SHIVANNA RANMALE,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
OCC: COOLIE,
2. SHANKAR S/O DEVINDRA RANMALE,
AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS,
OCC: STUDENT,
3. SUNIL S/O DEVINDRA RANMALE,
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS,
OCC: STUDENT,
4. SANGEETHA D/O DEVINDRA RANMALE,
Digitally signed by
RENUKA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
Location: HIGH OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
5. ANITA D/O DEVINDRA RANMALE,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
6. KIRAN S/O DEVINDRA RANMALE,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
OCC: COOLIE,
7. KAVERI S/O DEVINDRA RANMALE,
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8100
MFA No. 202587 of 2019
APPELLANT NOS.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS,
U/G OF THEIR FATHER APPELLANT NO.1,
ALL ARE R/O: YARANDI VILLAGE,
TQ: BASAVAKALYAN, DIST: BIDAR.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI SANJEEVKUMAR C. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE SECRETARY, MSRTC,
DR. ANAND RAO NAIR MARG.1,
MAHARASTRA, VAHATUK BHAVAN,
MUMBAI-400008, THROUGH
THE DEPOT. MANAGER, SATANA DEPOT.,
TQ: BAGLAN, DIST: NASHIK (MS)-420003.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI RAHUL R. ASTURE, ADVOCATE)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE
RECORD AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
27.03.2017 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. DIST. AND SESSIONS
COURT AND ADDL. MACT, BIDAR SITTING AT BASAVAKALYAN
IN MVC NO.467/2016 AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION
AMOUNT WITH COST.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8100
MFA No. 202587 of 2019
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
The captioned appeal is by the claimants questioning
the compensation determined by the Tribunal in MVC
No.467/2016. The respondent/Corporation admits its
liability. The appeal is purely on quantum.
2. The claimants filed a claim petition for having
lost one Prakash in a road traffic accident dated
10.12.2015. The Tribunal answered point No.1 in the
affirmative and by assessing the income of the deceased
notionally at Rs.7,500/- per month and without adding
future prospects and by wrongly applying a multiplier of
13, awarded a sum of Rs.5,85,000/- under the head of
loss of dependency. In all, Rs.6,25,000/- is awarded.
3. Heard the learned counsel on record. Perused
the judgment and award.
4. On re-assessing the material on record, this
Court is of the view that the Tribunal grossly erred in
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8100
assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.7,500/- per
month. The Tribunal also erred in not extending the future
prospects. This Court has also noticed that the Tribunal
has grossly adopted multiplier of 13.
5. In absence of income proof, this Court is
inclined to rely on the income chart prepared by the
Karnataka State Legal Serviced Authority. The accident is
of the year 2015. Therefore, the income of the deceased
is assessed notionally at Rs.8,000/- by adding 40%
towards future prospects, the income is assessed at
Rs.11,200/- per month. After deducting ½ towards
personal and living expenses of the deceased, the income
is taken at Rs.5,600/- and by applying a multiplier of 17,
the compensation payable under the head of loss of
dependency works out to Rs.11,42,400/-.
6. Under conventional heads, Rs.70,000/- is
awarded and by applying principles laid down by the Apex
Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8100
Pranay Sethi1, 10% escalation is awarded for every three
years on conventional heads which works out to
Rs.14,000/-. The total compensation re-determined by this
Court works out to Rs.12,26,400/- as against
Rs.6,25,000/-.
7. In the light of findings recorded supra, this
Court passes the following:
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The claimants are entitled for enhanced
compensation of Rs.6,01,400/- with
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from
the date of petition till its realization.
(2017) 16 SCC 680
NC: 2024:KHC-K:8100
iii. The enhanced amount shall be apportioned
in terms of the judgment rendered by the
Tribunal.
iv. Vide order dated 28.11.2022, the
appellants are not entitled to interest for
the delay period of 904 days on the
enhanced compensation.
Sd/-
(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE
RSP
CT-SW
