Karnataka High Court
Smt.Indira W/O Fakkirappa Akki vs Managing Director on 14 November, 2024
Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16695-DB
MFA No. 103700 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103700 OF 2015 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. INDIRA W/O. FAKKIRAPPA AKKI,
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. BYAHATTI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD.
2. MANJUNATH S/O, FAKKIRAPPA AKKI,
AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O. BYAHATTI, TQ: HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. DEEPAK MAGANUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, N.W.K.R.T.C,
Digitally signed
by JAGADISH T GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD.
R
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench
2. SELF INSURANCE FUND, N.W.K.R.T.C,
GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI, DIST: DHARWAD.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N. S. KINI, ADV. FOR R1 & R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO CALL
FOR RECORD AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD ORDER
DATED 01.09.2015, PASSED BY THE 1ST ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND ADDITIONAL MACT, HUBBALLI, IN MVC NO.563/2014 AND
AWARD THE JUST COMPENSATION, AS ENTITLED BY THE
APPELLANTS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16695-DB
MFA No. 103700 of 2015
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)
This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging
judgment & award dated 01.09.2015 passed in M.V.C.
No.563/2014 on the file of learned I Addl. Senior Civil Judge &
Member, Addl. MACT, Hubballi1, whereby the Tribunal awarded
compensation of Rs.7,56,480/- with interest at 6% p.a.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the claimants' case before the Tribunal
are as under:
On 15.03.2014, at about 5.00 hours, the driver of
NWKRTC2 Bus bearing registration No.KA-42/F-1143 was
proceeding from Hubli to Bangalore. When the said bus reached
near Kestur Cross on Sira-Tumkur NH-4 road, the driver of the
said bus drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and
dashed to rear part of on-going Lorry bearing registration
'Tribunal', for short
'Corporation', for short
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16695-DB
No.AP-21/V-8788. As a result, the deceased Fakkirappa, who
was a Conductor in the said bus, sustained severe head injuries
and died on the spot. The deceased Fakkirappa was aged about
53 years and drawing a salary of 25,827/- per month. Hence,
the claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Tribunal seeking
compensation on account of death of Fakkirappa Akki.
4. Before the Tribunal, the respondents/Corporation
refuted the claim petition by filing written statement and denied
all averments made in the claim petition.
5. The Tribunal considering Exs.P1 to P11, oral
evidence of PW1 & RW1, granted total compensation of
Rs.7,56,480/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of
petition till its realization. Being aggrieved by the same, the
claimants are in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants
vehemently contended that that the deceased was working as
Conductor in the Corporation bus and drawing a salary of
Rs.25,827/- per month. The claimants have produced copy of
Exs.P8 & P9-Pay slips and Ex.P11-Salary Certificate of the
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16695-DB
deceased. After deducting a sum of Rs.200/- towards
professional tax, the Tribunal ought to have taken the income
of the deceased at Rs.25,627/- per month instead of Rs.8,084/-
per month. Learned counsel further contended that the
Tribunal committed an error in not awarding any amount
towards future prospects of the deceased. The compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under the conventional heads is also
on the lower side. Thus, he prays for allowing the appeal by
enhancing the compensation reasonably.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the
respondents/Corporation supports the impugned judgment and
award of the Tribunal and sought to dismiss the appeal.
8. There is no dispute as to the occurrence of the
accident resulting in death of deceased Fakkirappa Akki and
also liability of the respondent/Corporation to pay
compensation. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and on perusal of the appeal papers, the only point that would
arise for our consideration in this appeal is:
"Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by
the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for
enhancement?"
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16695-DB
9. Admittedly, the deceased Fakkirappa Akki was
working as a Conductor in the Corporation bus. A perusal of
Exs.P8 & P9 Pay Slips & Ex.P11-Salary Certificate of the
deceased, they would indicate that the deceased was drawing
monthly salary of Rs.25,827/-. The Tribunal after deductions,
considered the net income of the deceased at Rs.8,084/- per
month, to reckon the loss of dependency, which is contrary to
the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Helen C. Rebello Vs. Maharashtra SRTC3, wherein the
Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that, the only
admissible deductions to be made from the salary of the
employee, are 'income tax' and 'professional tax' and any
contributions made towards LIC, PF, GPF, pension, gratuity etc.
have no co-relation with the compensation receivable by the
dependents under the under the Motor Vehicles Act and those
contributions cannot be considered as deductions for the
purpose of awarding loss of dependency.
10. In the instant case, a sum of Rs.200/- is deducted
towards professional tax from the salary of the deceased and
other deductions are contributions towards KGID, PF, Education
(1999)1 SCC 90
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16695-DB
fund, Festival Advance, RF Advance etc and these contributions
are towards the benefit of the family. Therefore, in the case on
hand, as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Helen
C. Rebello supra, the only deduction, which is admissible to be
made from the salary of the deceased, is 'professional tax' of
Rs.200/- per month, which does not come to the benefit of the
family of the deceased. In that circumstance, the Tribunal
ought to have deducted a sum of Rs.200/- towards professional
tax out of Rs.25,827/-. If a sum of Rs.200/- is deducted
towards professional tax, net salary of the deceased for the
purpose of computation of loss of dependency would be
Rs.25,627/- per month, that would be the income of the
deceased to be taken into consideration for awarding loss of
dependency.
11. It is not in dispute that the deceased was aged
about 53 years at the time of the accident. The Tribunal has
erred in not considering the future prospects of the deceased,
which the claimants would be entitled to at 15% of the
assessed income, placing reliance on a decision of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16695-DB
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others4, as the deceased was in
the age group of 50-60 years and was a permanent employee.
There is no dispute with regard to multiplier applicable to the
age of the deceased as '11' and also appropriate deduction
towards personal expenses of the deceased at 1/3rd, as there
are two dependents. Thus, loss of dependency is reckoned as
under:
Rs.25,627 + 15% (Rs.3,844) = 29,471 x 1/3 = Rs.9823.67
Rs.29,471-Rs.9823.67=Rs.19647.33x 12 x 11 = Rs.25,93,448
12. The Tribunal has committed an error in not
awarding fair compensation under the head of loss of
consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses. As per the
judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs Nanu
Ram @ Churu Ram & Others5 and Pranay Sethi supra, the
claimants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards loss of
consortium, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and
Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. Thus, in all, the
claimants are entitled to modified compensation as under:
(2017) 16 SCC 680
2018 (18) SCC 130
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16695-DB
Loss of dependency Rs.25,93,448/-
Loss of consortium (Rs.40000x2) Rs. 80,000/-
Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/-
Funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/-
------------------
Total Rs.27,03,448/-
------------------
13. Thus, the claimants are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.27,03,448/- as against Rs.7,56,480/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
14. In the result, we pass the following:
ORDER
a) The appeal filed by the claimants is allowed
in part.
b) The impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal is modified holding that the
claimants would be entitled to total
compensation of Rs.27,03,448/- as against
Rs.7,56,480/- awarded by the Tribunal.
c) The enhanced compensation amount shall
carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum
from the date of petition till its realization.
d) Respondent/Corporation shall deposit the
enhanced compensation with accrued interest
before the Tribunal within a period of six
weeks from the date of receipt of certified
copy of this judgment.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:16695-DB
e) Apportionment, disbursement and deposit
shall be made in terms of the award of the
Tribunal.
f) Draw modified award accordingly.
g) Registry is directed to send a copy of this
judgment to the Tribunal forthwith along with
TCR.
h) No order as to costs.
Sd/-
(H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
JTR/ct-an
