Karnataka High Court

Pooja W/O Late Santosh And Ors vs M/S Telangana State Road Transport ... on 3 September, 2024

Author: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav

Bench: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav

                                             -1-
                                                     NC: 2024:KHC-K:6572-DB
                                                    MFA No. 200624 of 2021




                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                                     KALABURAGI BENCH

                        DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

                                          PRESENT

                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
                                            AND
                    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR

                         MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200624/2021(MV-D)


                   BETWEEN:

                   1.   POOJA W/O LATE SANTOSH
                        AGE: 25 YEARS,
                        OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
                        R/O VILLAGE GORNAL,
                        TQ. BHALKI,
                        BIDAR- 584 101.

                   2.   SHIVAPRASAD S/O LATE SANTOSH,
                        AGE: 4 YEARS 02 MONTHS, MINOR,
Digitally signed
                        U/G OF HIS MOTHER/APPELLANT NO.1
by SHILPA R             SMT. POOJA W/O LATE SANTOSH,
TENIHALLI
Location: HIGH
                        R/O VILLAGE GORNAL,
COURT OF                TQ. BHALKI,
KARNATAKA
                        BIDAR- 584 101.

                   3.   SHARNAMMA W/O JAGANNATH
                        AGE: 53 YEARS,
                        OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
                        R/O VILLAGE GORNAL,
                        TQ. BHALKI,
                        BIDAR- 584 101.
                                                              ...APPELLANTS
                   (BY SRI BABU H. METAGUDDA, ADVOCATE)
                           -2-
                                    NC: 2024:KHC-K:6572-DB
                                   MFA No. 200624 of 2021




AND:

M/S. TELANGANA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION
HYDERABAD,
REPRESENTED BY
DEPOT MANAGER, TSRTC.
HYDERABAD-II DEPOT,
SAROOR NAGAR,
DIST: RANGAREDDY - 500 035.
                                            ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI S.V. DESHMUKH, ADVOCATE)

     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 05.07.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.623/2017 BY
THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND
PRINCIPAL M.A.C.T. AT BIDAR AND ENHANCING THE
COMPENSATION FROM RS.15,93,268/- WITH 6% INTEREST TO
RS.44, 60,000/- WITH 12% INTEREST.

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:


CORAM:    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV
          AND
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR


                   ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR)

The claimants have questioned the judgment and

award dated 05.07.2019 passed in MVC No.623 of 2017 by

the Principal District and Sessions Judge and Principal

NC: 2024:KHC-K:6572-DB

MACT, Bidar, (Hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for the

sake of convenience), on the ground of inadequacy of the

compensation. So far as respondent - M/s. Telangana

State Road Transport Corporation is concerned, no appeal

is filed being aggrieved by the said judgment and award.

2. The brief facts of the case of the appellants are

as under:

a) The appellants filed a claim petition before the

Tribunal under Section 166 of the M.V. Act, claiming

compensation of Rs.44,60,000 on account of death of

husband of the 1st appellant, namely Santosh, in a road

traffic accident that occurred on 07.05.2017 at 06:00

p.m., near Lalbagh on Bidar-Bhalki Road, within the limits

of Janwada Police Station because of rash and negligent

driving of a bus belonging to the respondent bearing

registration No.AP-29/Z-3748 by its driver. In the

accident, he suffered fatal injuries and died on the spot

itself. It is stated that, the deceased was aged 30 years,

earning Rs.15,000/- per month by working as Accountant

NC: 2024:KHC-K:6572-DB

with one Pharmaceutical Distributors and he was the only

bread earner in the family. It is also stated that they have

performed his last ceremony by spending Rs.50,000/-.

b) The respondent appeared before the Tribunal

and resisted the petition by filing detailed objection

statement, inter-alia denied with regard to the age,

occupation and dependency, so also the nature of the

accident in the manner stated by the claimants.

c) Based upon the rival pleadings of both the

parties, the Tribunal framed the relevant issues. To

substantiate their case, the wife of the deceased entered

the witness box as PW1, examined one witness by name

Lokesh as PW2 and got marked the documents as per

Exs.P1 to P9. On behalf of the respondent, no oral or

documentary evidence is led by the respondent.

d) On hearing the arguments and by evaluating

the evidence, the Tribunal held that, the said accident has

taken place because of the rash and negligent driving of

NC: 2024:KHC-K:6572-DB

the bus by its driver, and allowed the claim petition in part

awarding compensation Rs.15,93,268/-.

3. Being aggrieved, the claimants are before this

Court seeking enhancement of compensation.

4. We have heard the learned counsels on both

the sides and perused the materials available on record.

5. Respondent has not preferred any appeal

against the impugned judgment and award with regarding

the negligence on part of driver of respondent and

regarding liability fastened by the Tribunal. Accordingly,

the said finding has attained finality.

6. The claimants claimed that the deceased was

earning Rs.15,000/- per month, but except their self

serving statement and the evidence of PW2, no material is

placed on record to prove the same. In the absence of

same, the Tribunal assessed the notional income of the

deceased at Rs.8,000/- per month. This appears to be on

lower side. It requires to be enhanced in the light of

NC: 2024:KHC-K:6572-DB

Circular issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services

Authority. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice,

considering the year of accident, we re-assess the income

of the deceased at Rs.10,250/-.

7. Further, as per the judgment in the case of

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi reported

in (2017) 16 SCC 680, as the claimants in this appeal

have lost the only bread earner in the family and he was

just 30 years old at the time of accident. Therefore, some

compensation towards future prospects have to be added

at 40% of his monthly income, which comes to Rs.4,100/-.

That means, the monthly income of the deceased comes

to Rs.10,250/- + Rs.4,100/- = Rs.14,350/-. It is to be

multiplied with '12', which comes to Rs.1,72,200/-. Out of

this, 1/3 is to be deducted towards personal expenses of

the deceased, as the deceased was a married person

having three dependents. It comes to Rs.1,14,800/- per

annum. As per Schedule, the appropriate multiplier that is

NC: 2024:KHC-K:6572-DB

applicable is '17'. Thus, loss of dependency is calculated

at (Rs.1,14,800/- x 17) = Rs.19,51,600/-.

8. As there are three dependents, towards loss of

consortium Rs.40,000/- each is to be awarded which

comes to Rs.1,20,000/-. So far as loss of estate and

funeral expenses is concerned, as per the judgment in the

case of Praney Sethi (supra), in all together if

Rs.30,000/- is awarded, it would meet the ends of justice

and accordingly, it is awarded.

9. Thus, the claimants are held entitled for

enhanced compensation under the following heads:

Sl.

                      Heads                           Amount
No.
1      Loss of dependency                           Rs.19,51,600/-

2      Loss of consortium                            Rs.1,20,000/-
       (Rs.40,000/- x 3)

3      Loss of estate                                     Rs.15,000/-

4      Towards funeral expenses                           Rs.15,000/-

                                      Total        Rs.21,01,600/-

                                          NC: 2024:KHC-K:6572-DB

10. The Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of

6% per annum and claimants seek 12% interest before

this Court. But no ground is made out for enhancement of

rate of interest from 6% to 12% and the same is just and

proper.

11. Resultantly, we pass the following:

ORDER

(i) The appeal is allowed in part.

(ii) The appellants-claimants are entitled for

total compensation of Rs.21,01,600/- with

interest at 6% per annum from the date

of petition till realization, as against

Rs.15,93,268/- awarded by the Tribunal

and thus appellants are held entitled for

enhanced compensation of Rs.5,08,332/-

with interest at 6% per annum from the

date of petition till its realization.

NC: 2024:KHC-K:6572-DB

(iii) The respondent is directed to deposit the

entire compensation amount with interest

within a period of six weeks from today.

(iv) The order made by the Tribunal with

regard to apportionment and investment

remains unaltered.

(v) There shall be modified award in the

above terms.

(vi) Send back the Trial Court Records along