Karnataka High Court

Vasugi vs The Managing Director on 3 September, 2024

                                                     -1-
                                                                 NC: 2024:KHC:35912
                                                               MFA No.3982 of 2023
                                                           C/W MFA No.3983 of 2023



                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                             DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
                                                BEFORE
                           THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
                       MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3982/2023 (MV-D)
                                                     C/W
                       MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3983/2023 (MV-D)

                      IN MFA No.3982/2023

                      BETWEEN:

                      THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
                      BMTC, CENTRAL OFFICE
                      K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR
                      BANGALORE, KARNATAKA-560027.

Digitally signed by   BMTC BUS BEARING NO.KA-42-F-1691
AASEEFA PARVEEN       REPRESENTED BY IT'S CHIEF LAW OFFICER.
Location: HIGH                                                         ...APPELLANT
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                      (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,)
                      AND:

                      1.    VASUGI
                            W/O LATE MURUGESH
                            AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

                      2.    DEELIP KUMAR
                            S/O LATE MURUGESH
                            AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS.
                            BOTH ARE R/AT. NO.U-41
                            2ND MAIN ROAD
                            2ND BLOCK, ANJINAYA BLOCK
                            SHESHADRIPURAM
                            BENGALURU-560020.
                                                                    ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V .SHASTRI, ADV., FOR R1 & R2)
                                -2-
                                           NC: 2024:KHC:35912
                                         MFA No.3982 of 2023
                                     C/W MFA No.3983 of 2023



      THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.30.12.2022 PASSED IN MVC
NO.5160/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL JUDGE,
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU CITY, (SCCH-
6),   AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.22,15,000/- WITH
INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION
TILL ITS REALIZATION.


IN MFA NO.3983/2023

BETWEEN:

1.   VASUGI
     W/O LATE MURUGESH
     AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS.

2.   DEELIP KUMAR
     S/O MURUGESH
     AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS.

     ALL ARE RESIDING AT
     NO. U-41, 2ND MAIN ROAD
     2ND BLOCK, ANJINAYA BLOCK
     SHESHADRIPURAM
     BENGALORE-560020.
                                               ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADV.,)

AND:

     THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
     BMTC, CENTRAL OFFICE
     K.H. ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR
     BANGALORE
     KARNATAKA-560027.
                                              ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,)
                                   -3-
                                               NC: 2024:KHC:35912
                                            MFA No.3982 of 2023
                                        C/W MFA No.3983 of 2023



   THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.30.12.2022 PASSED IN MVC
NO.5160/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL JUDGE,
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, (SCCH-6), PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

    THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:     HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

                        ORAL JUDGMENT

Heard Sri.F.S.Dabali learned counsel for the appellant in

MFA No.3982/2023, who is also appearing for the respondent in

the connected appeal i.e., MFA No.3983/2023. Learned counsel

appears physically before this Court and argues. Also heard

Sri.Shripad V Shastri learned counsel for the respondents in

MFA No.3982/2023 who is appearing for the appellants in MFA

No.3983/2023. Learned counsel Sri.Shripad V Shastri appears

through video conference.

2. The order that is rendered by the Motor Accidents

Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC No.5160/2021 dated

30.12.2022 has resulted in these two appeals. The parties to

the appeals will hereinafter be referred to as the 'Corporation'

and 'Claimants' for the sake of convenience of discussion. While

NC: 2024:KHC:35912

the Corporation disputes its liability to pay compensation, the

claimants are before this Court seeking enhancement of

compensation.

3. As against the claim for Rs.50,00,000/-, the

Tribunal, through the impugned order, awarded a sum of

Rs.22,15,000/- as compensation.

4. Arguing in respect of merits of the matter

Sri.F.S.Dabali, representing the Corporation, contends that the

deceased Gopi was negligent while crossing the road and due

to his negligence, the accident occurred. The driver of the

Corporation was not at fault. But the Tribunal fastened liability

against the Corporation. Learned counsel states that Ex.P5

sketch speaks about the manner of happening of accident and

thus, considering the said document, the appeal filed by the

Corporation is required to be allowed.

5. Opposing the submission thus made, Sri.Shirpad V

Shastri learned counsel for the claimants contends that the

accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the

driver of the Corporation. The deceased Gopi died when he was

hit by the bus of the Corporation. Even after investigation

NC: 2024:KHC:35912

charge sheet is laid against the driver of the Corporation. Thus,

the Tribunal rightly fastened liability against the Corporation

and therefore, the appeal filed by the Corporation is

unjustifiable.

6. The manner of happening of accident as projected

by the claimants before the Tribunal is that on 03.09.2021

while the deceased Gopi was proceeding on road as pedestrian

and while he was crossing the road near Main Gard Junction,

Cubbon Road, Bengaluru, the Driver of the Corporation bus

bearing registration No.KA-42-F-1691 came at a high speed

driving the bus in a rash and negligent manner and dashed

against the deceased Gopi due to which he sustained grievous

injuries on vital parts of the body and succumbed to injuries.

Ex.P2 complaint formed basis for the police to register a case

and investigate. Charge sheet was laid against the driver of the

Corporation duly observing that due to the rash and negligent

driving of the driver of the Corporation the accident occurred.

This is evidenced by the contents of Ex.P3 charge sheet. This is

not a case of res ispa loquitur. Ex.P5 sketch alone cannot

establish the manner of happening of accident. No convincing

evidence is produced by the Corporation to establish that the

NC: 2024:KHC:35912

deceased Gopi was at fault. Considering the evidence that is

produced in toto, the Tribunal came to a conclusion that the

claimants succeeded in establishing that the deceased Gopi

died due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the

Corporation. Thus, this Court does not find any grounds to

interfere with the findings given by the Tribunal in that regard.

7. It is not in dispute that the deceased Gopi died as

bachelor. Therefore, as rightly submitted by Sri.Shripad V

Shastri learned counsel for the claimants, the Tribunal ought to

have deducted 50% of the earnings towards the personal and

living expenses which the deceased would have incurred for

himself had he been alive. But the Tribunal deducted 1/3rd of

the earnings which is improper.

8. The claimants are the mother and brother of the

deceased Gopi. Their version is that as mason the deceased

was earning Rs.20,000/- per month. As rightly contended by

Sri.F.S.Dabali, no proof is produced by the claimants to

establish the occupation and earnings of the deceased Gopi by

the date of accident. The submission that is made by learned

counsel Sri.Shripad V Shastri in this regard is that the accident

NC: 2024:KHC:35912

occurred in the year 2021 and for the relevant period even the

Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the Notional

Income as Rs.15,000/- per month and therefore, the said figure

is required to be applied. Sri.F.S.Dabali learned counsel for

Corporation did not raise any objection to take the Notional

Income as Rs.15,000/- per month as sought for by the learned

counsel for the claimants. Therefore, this Court considers

desirable to take the Notional Income of the deceased as

Rs.15,000/- per month.

9. Admittedly, the deceased Gopi died at the age of 30

years. Therefore, 40% of the earnings are required to be added

towards future prospects as per the decision of the Hon'ble

Apex Court Court in National Insurance Company Limited vs.

Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680. The

appropriate multiplier to be applied is '17' as per the decision of

the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma and Others vs Delhi

Transport Corporation and Another. Thus, the compensation

which the claimants are entitled to under the head loss of

dependency is as under:

NC: 2024:KHC:35912

Amount Description In Rs.

Notional Income per month                                   15,000-00
Annual Income (Rs.15,000X12)                              1,80,000-00
Add        40%        towards    future
                                                          2,52,000-00
prospects (Rs.1,80,000+40%)

Deduct 50% towards personal and living 1,26,000-00 expenses Loss of dependency on applying 21,42,000-00 appropriate multiplier '17'

10. Thus, the compensation which the claimants

are entitled to under the head loss of dependency is

Rs.21,42,000/-. Together with the said amount, the claimants

are entitled to Rs.16,500/-, towards funeral expenses and

Rs.16,500/- towards loss of estate. The first claimant being the

mother of the deceased is entitled to Rs.44,000/- towards loss

of filial consortium. Thus, the total compensation which the

claimants are entitled to is as under:

       Sl                                               Amount
                        Compensation
      No.                                                in Rs.
      1         Loss of dependency                  21,42,000-00
      2         Funeral expenses                         16,500-00
      3         Loss of estate                           16,500-00

      4         Loss of filial Consortium                44,000-00
                Total                             22,19,000-00

                                               NC: 2024:KHC:35912

11. Learned counsel Sri.F.S.Dabali submits that a sum

of Rs.25,000/- was paid to the claimants towards interim

compensation and Ex.R3 to that effect is also produced.

Learned counsel Sri.Shripad V Shastri did not deny the said

payment. Therefore, out of the total compensation granted, a

sum of Rs.25,000/- is required to be deducted. Thus, the

compensation which claimants are entitled to get is

Rs.21,94,000/- (Rs.22,19,000-Rs.25,000/-). The Tribunal

through the impugned order awarded a sum of Rs.22,15,000/-

as compensation. However, the justifiable sum which the

claimants are entitled to is Rs.21,94,000/-. Therefore, both the

appeals are disposed of with the following:

ORDER

(i) MFA No.3982/2023 is allowed in part.

(ii) The compensation that is awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru through orders in MVC No.5160/2021, dated 30.12.2022 is reduced from Rs.22,15,000/- to Rs.21,94,000/-.