Appeal against Motor Vehicles Act compensation award enhanced from ₹3,80,000 to ₹7,45,948. Court corrected age-based multiplier, increased loss of consortium and funeral expenses per Supreme Court guidelines.
Impugned award modified; compensation enhanced to Rs. 7,45,948/-. Amount to be paid within six weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.DESAI
M.F.A. NO.5902 OF 2013 (MV)
BETWEEN:
APPELLANT Nos.1 TO 3 ARE RESIDING AT SUBMANGALA, KASABA HOBLI, ANEKALTALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-591213.
APPELLANT Nos.4 AND 5 ARE RESIDING AT ANJANAPURA, KONANA KUNTE CROSS, BANGALORE - 560 050.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SHRI CUCKOO DELHI, ADVOCATE)
2
AND:
THE MANAGER LEGAL, K.S.R.T.C, SHANTHINAGAR, DOUBLE ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 027.
…RESPONDENT
(BY SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMI K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SHANKARGOUD. G, ADVOCATE)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:23.02.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.1733/2012 ON THE FILE OF XIII ADDL. SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal lays challenge to the judgment and award passed by the XIII Additional Small Cause Judge, and Member, MACT, Bengaluru on 23.02.2013 in MVC No.1733/2012, wherein the tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.3,80,000/- with interest at 6% per annum to the petitioners from the date of petition till realization of entire amount.
3
standing in the bus stop in front of Gandhi Kuteera circle, Anekal Town, at that time, the driver of the bus bearing registration No.KA-41-F-034 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased. Due to the impact, said Patalappa fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, after the accident, he was shifted to Anekal Government hospital and thereafter, he was shifted to Bengaluru Hospital, but on the way to the hospital, Patalappa succumbed to the injuries sustained in the accident. The petitioners being the wife and children of deceased filed a claim petition contending that the deceased was hale and healthy before the accident and was working as a Mason. They have spent around Rs.10,000/for transportation of dead body and Rs.50,000/- towards funeral expenses and prays for award of compensation.
4
4. The tribunal after considering the pleadings and
contentions of the parties, framed the following issues:
“1. Whether the petitioners prove that deceased Sri.Patalappa was died in RTA arising out of accident alleged to have been taken place on 25.10.2011 at about 4:00 p.m. in front of Gandhi Kuteera Cricle, Anekal Town, due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus bearing No.KA-41-F-034?
2. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so what amount and from whom?
3. What order or award?”
5
6. After hearing the arguments of learned counsel
for the parties and perusing the records, the tribunal has passed the impugned judgment and award which is now challenge in this appeal.
6
family. Therefore, learned counsel for the appellants prayed to modify the impugned judgment and award by enhancing the compensation.
for the parties and perused the entire records and evidence.
7
tribunal held that in the absence of proof of any income and documentary evidence, it is appropriate to take income of the deceased at Rs.5,000/- per month. The accident occurred in the year 2011. In the absence of proof of income, the notional income of the deceased is to be assessed as per the chart accepted in the Lok-Adalath, is Rs.6,500/- for the year 2011. Hence, it is just and proper to take income of the deceased at Rs.6,500/- per month for the year 2011.
8
only guess work. The villagers may not be knowing exact year, when actually they are born and as per ration card, the tribunal cannot assess the approximate age of the deceased. Looking to the other evidence and documents produced by the petitioners, the age of the deceased can be taken as ‘47’ years and as per the decision of Sarla Verma’s case supra, the appropriate multiplier applicable to the age group of 47 is ‘13’ and the multiplier applied by the tribunal as ‘11’ is not just and reasonable. As there are two dependents, 1/3rd income of the deceased has to be deducted towards his personal and living expenses as per the decision of Sarla Verma’s case supra . Accordingly, the compensation towards ‘loss of dependency’ works out to Rs.6,500 x 1/3 = 2167 – 6,500 = Rs.4,333/-. Rs.4,333/- x 12 x 13 = Rs.6,75,948/-.
9
Nanu Ram and others, the wife is entitled for a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of spousal consortium.
the appellants, the compensation awarded by the tribunal need to be re-judged and recalculated under the difference
heads of compensation as under:-
| Sl. No. |
Particulars | Compensation awarded by the Tribunal |
Compensation determined by court |
re- this |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Loss of dependency |
Rs.3.30,000/- | Rs.6,75,948/- | |
| 2. | Loss ofspouse | Rs.20,000/- | Rs.40,000/- |
10
| consortium and parental consortium |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 3. | Love and affection |
Rs.10,000/- | -- |
| 4. | Loss toEstate | Rs.10,000/- | Rs.15,000/- |
| 5. | Funeral expenses |
Rs.10,000/- | Rs.15,000/- |
| Total | Rs.3,80,000/- | Rs.7,45,948/- |
In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
the XIII Additional Small Causes Judge, and Member, MACT, Bengaluru dated 23.02.2013 having been modified,
the compensation is enhanced to Rs.7,45,948/- (Rupees Seven Lakh Forty Five Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty Eight only) instead of Rs.3,80,000/- awarded by the tribunal.
(iii) However, the other conditions of the tribunal regarding apportionment and interest remained unaltered.
11
(iv) The respondent-corporation shall make good the differential amount within a period of six weeks from
the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
(V) Costs made easy.
(vi) Send back the records to the tribunal.
Sd/JUDGE
HJ
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the multiplier of 13 applicable to deceased aged 47 years should be applied instead of 11?
Whether the compensation for loss of consortium and funeral expenses needs to be enhanced based on Supreme Court precedents?
Whether the total compensation awarded by the tribunal is reasonable after adjusting age and dependency calculations?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. V. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr.Relied on¶44
Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. V. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. (2009) 6 SCC 121 · Who else cites this
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nanu Ram and othersFollowed¶54
Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Nanu Ram and others (2018) 18 Supreme Court Cases 130
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and othersFollowed¶56
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and others (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680
Mrs. Gowramma
Sri. Avinash. P
Smt. Jayamma
Smt. Uma
Smt. Bhagua
The Manager Legal, K.S.R.T.C
P.N.Desai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
