Karnataka High Court
Shivaram vs The Managing Director on 2 September, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:35702
MFA No.5376 of 2017
C/W MFA No.7903/2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
MFA NO. 5376 OF 2017 C/W
MFA NO. 7903 OF 2017 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SHIVARAM
S/O LATE CHIKKEGOWDA @ MAYIGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
2. SMT.NINGAMMA
D/O LATE CHIKKEGOWDA @ MAYIGAIAH
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
BOTH ARE R/AT KOTE MATADA BEEDI
CHANNAPATNA TOWN, RAMANAGARA
TALUK AND DISTRICT-562 160
...APPELLANTS IN MFA NO.5376/2017
...RESPONDENTS IN MFA NO.7903/2017
(BY SRI. K.P.BHUVAN, ADV.)
AND:
Digitally signed by THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
PRAJWAL A KSRTC, KENGAL HANUMANTHA ROAD
Location: HIGH COURT SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 027
OF KARNATAKA
...RESPONDENT IN MFA NO.5376/2017
...APPELLANT IN MFA NO.7903/2017
(BY SRI. B.PALAKSHAIAH, ADV.)
THESE MFA'S ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.2.2017
PASSED IN MVC NO.264/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDE, MACT CHANNAPATTANA, RAMANAGAR
DISTRICT, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION AND IN MFA NO.7903 OF 2017 AWARDING
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:35702
MFA No.5376 of 2017
C/W MFA No.7903/2017
COMPENSATION OF RS.4,20,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
In these appeals, the petitioners are seeking
enhancement of compensation and the KSRTC has
challenged the quantum of compensation.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall
be referred to as per their status before the Tribunal.
3. Undisputedly, there was an accident on
13.11.2013 at 8.30 PM involving the KSRTC bus
bearing No.KA-10/F-0211 and one Shivanna @
Shivappa, the deceased, who is the brother of
petitioners, was hit by KSRTC bus while crossing the
B.M.Road near Doddamalur village of Channapatna
Taluk in front of Sri Sai Kalyan Mantap. The deceased
was treated at Government Hospital, Channapatna, but
he was succumbed to death. The petitioners as
dependents approached the Tribunal for grant of
NC: 2024:KHC:35702
compensation. Claim was opposed by the KSRTC. After
taking the evidence and hearing both parties, the
Tribunal by impugned judgment awarded compensation
of Rs.4,20,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. Pleading
inadequacy and seeking enhancement of compensation,
the petitioners and challenging the assessment of
dependency, the KSRTC are before this Court.
4. Heard the arguments of Sri.K.P.Bhuvan,
learned counsel for the petitioners and
Sri.B.Palakshaiah, learned counsel for the KSRTC.
5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the
KSRTC that the deceased was aged 50 years, the
accident is of the year 2013, both the petitioners being
brother and sister of the deceased are major, they are
married and settled independently, they are not
dependants. The Tribunal has erroneously considered
them as dependants and assessed the loss of
dependency and sought for modification of the
impugned judgment.
NC: 2024:KHC:35702
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioners
has contended that the deceased was a bachelor, he
was residing with the petitioners. The petitioners are
depending on the income of the deceased. Hence,
they cannot be treated as non-dependants, the
Tribunal has rightly considered them as dependants
and assessed the loss of dependency.
6.1. It is further contended that the income taken
by the Tribunal is on the lower side as the deceased
was doing agricultural work and earning more than
Rs.10,000/- per month and he sought for enhancement
of compensation.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the
arguments addressed on behalf of both sides and
perused the materials on record.
8. There is no dispute as to the accident and the
liability on the part of the KSRTC to pay compensation.
The evidence on record shows that the deceased
though was aged 50 years, he was a bachelor. As
NC: 2024:KHC:35702
rightly contended by the learned counsel for the
petitioners, he may be residing with either of the
petitioners, but petitioner No.1 is younger brother and
petitioner No.2 is the elder sister of the deceased, they
are already married, they have their own dependency.
Hence, it is not proper to treat the petitioners as
dependants, however, as legal representatives, they
are entitled to claim compensation.
9. The accident is of the year 2013 and there is
no proof of income of the deceased. The notional
income of the deceased has to be taken at Rs.8,000/-
per month. For his age, 10% appreciation towards
future prospects has to be considered and 50% has to
be deducted towards personal expenses. Thus, loss of
dependency will be Rs.8,000/- + Rs.800/- (10%) =
Rs.8,800/- - Rs.4,400/- (50%) = Rs.4,400/- x 12 x 13
= Rs.6,86,400/-. 30% of it has to be considered as
loss of estate to the petitioners, it comes to
Rs.2,05,920/-. Towards loss of love and affection and
NC: 2024:KHC:35702
funeral expenses under conventional heads,
Rs.40,000/- each and Rs.15,000/- with addition of
10% appreciation in view of the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Co.Ltd. -
vs- Pranay Sethi and Others 1, comes to
Rs.1,04,500/-. If all are summed up, total
compensation comes to Rs.3,10,420/- as against
Rs.4,20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, thereby
reduction of Rs.1,09,580/-.
10. Hence, appeal filed by the petitioners are
devoid of merits and appeal filed by the KSRTC merits
consideration, in the result, the following:
ORDER
i) M.F.A.No.5376/2017 is dismissed;
ii) M.F.A.No.7903/2017 is allowed in part;
iii) Impugned judgment and award is
modified;
(2017) 16 SCC 680
NC: 2024:KHC:35702
iv) Petitioners are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.3,10,420/- instead of
Rs.4,20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal
with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of
petition till the date of deposit;
v) The KSRTC is directed to deposit
Rs.3,10,420/- with interest @ 6% per
annum within eight weeks from the date
of receipt of certified copy of the
judgment;
vi) Amount in deposit shall be transmitted to
the Tribunal along with records forthwith;
vii) The excess amount, if any, deposited shall
be returned to the KSRTC;
viii) The entire compensation amount shall be
released in favour of the petitioners.
SD/-
(T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA)
JUDGE
KNM
