Appellants filed a miscellaneous first appeal under Section 173(1) of the MV Act seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Trial Court following a motor vehicle accident.
Enhancement of compensation by Rs. 11,16,200/- together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization.
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.
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. M. JOSHI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3685 OF 2020 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
Digitally signed by T S NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka
THE APPELLANT NOS. 4 & 5 ARE R/AT. KOOLYA VILLAGE, H.D.KOTE TALUK,
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
CHAMARAJANAGAR - 571 125.
THE APPELLANT NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER I.E APPELLANT NO.1.
APPELLANT NO.1 TO 3 R/AT. KARYA VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TALUK, MADAPURA POST, HULLAHALLI HOBLI, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571 119.
…APPELLANTS
(BY SRI BHANU PRAKASH H V., ADVOCATE)
AND:
INTERNAL INSURER OF THE KSRTC BUS BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KA-09-F-4075).
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
AGED MAJOR, R/AT BEHIND VIDYODAYA COLLEGE, BYRAPURA, T.N.PURA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT - 571 124.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. B.P.RADHA., ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 & R3 ARE DISPENDED WITH V/O DATED 3-11-22)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12/06/2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.974/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE, ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES AND SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, C.M.JOSHI J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
By the consent of learned counsel on both the sides, the
matter is taken up for final disposal though, it is posted for orders.
Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 12-06-2019 passed in MVC No.974/2016 by the learned Judge, Additional Small Causes and Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Mysuru, whereby partly allowed the petition filed by
the petitioners and awarded the compensation of
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
Rs.10,40,500/- together with interest at 6% p.a., petitioners have preferred this appeal urging various grounds.
before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience.
That on 07.01.2016 at about 12.15 AM in the midnight when Raju(deceased) was travelling in a K.S.R.T.C Bus bearing Regn No.KA 09 F 4075 from Suburban Bus stand to his house and when the said bus reached Columbia Asia Junction Mysuru City, the driver of said bus drove the same in rash and negligent manner in high speed and dashed against a lorry bearing Regn.No.KA 55-4001 and caused accident. Due to the impact, the said Raju sustained grievous injuries on his stomach, head and other parts of the body. Immediately, he was shifted to K.R. Hospital, Mysuru for treatment where he had admitted as inpatient for 40 days and spent Rs.1,00,000/towards medical expenditure, but unfortunately, he died on 17.02.2016.
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
It was further stated that, prior to the accident,
deceased was hale and healthy, aged about 35 years, doing mason work and watch man work and he was earning Rs.15.000/- per month and he was maintaining the family.
Due to the untimely death of said Raju the 1st petitioner lost her husband, 2nd and 3rd petitioners lost love of their father, 4th and 5th Petitioner lost their loving son. The 1st respondent is the internal insurer of K.S.R.T.C., bus which caused accident. As such, prays to direct the respondent to pay compensation of Rs.30.00.000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of accident till its realization.
appeared through their counsel and respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed their respective statements of objection. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the insurer and owner of the lorry against which the bus had collided with.
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
maintainable either in law or on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed. It was further contended that the petitioners
are put to strict proof of averments of petition and that the alleged accident occurred due to negligence on the part of driver of vehicle bearing Regn.No.KA.55/4001. The petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties and 1st respondent has paid interim compensation of Rs.5,000/-. It was further contended that the accident took place due to collision between two vehicles i.e., Lorry bearing Regn.No.KA.55/4001 and the K.S.R.T.C.. Bus bearing Regn.No.KA 09 F 4075. Hence, the owner and insurer of the said Lorry are necessary parties. The amount of compensation and interest claimed is excessive and exorbitant and prays to dismiss the claim petition.
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
averments of petition such as, age, occupation, income of the deceased and also put to strict proof fact of accident and it is
not liable to pay any compensation and prayed to dismiss the petition.
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
| Towards medical expenses | Rs. 11,500/- |
|---|---|
| Towards Loss of consortium | Rs. 50,000/- |
| Towards loss of love and affection | Rs. 50,000/- |
| Towards estate | Rs. 40,000/- |
| Towards transportation and funeral | Rs. 25,000/- |
| expenses | |
| Towards loss of dependency | Rs. 8,64,000/- |
| TOTAL | RS.10,40,500/- |
The Tribunal has also directed to deduct the interim
compensation of Rs.5,000/- given by the 1st respondent.
approached this Court in the appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
13 . The fact that the accident occurred due to the driver
of the bus owned by 1st respondent is not in dispute. The Tribunal has considered the evidence of the PW1 and also the police papers produced at Exs.P1 to P6 and came to the conclusion that when the chargesheet is not rebutted by cogent evidence, the liability has to be fastened against 1st respondent.
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
prescribed under the Minimum Wages Act. Therefore, by adopting the monthly income at Rs.9,500/- and providing future prospects at 40%, the multiplicand comes to Rs.9,500/- + 3,800/- = 13,300/-. By deducting 1/4th towards the personal expenses, the effective compensation under the head of loss of dependency is calculated as Rs.9,975/- x 12 x 16 = 1,91,200/- by adopting a multiplier of 16.
under the head of loss of estate and funeral expenses.
1 2018 SCC ONLINE SC 1546
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
| Towards medical expenses | Rs. 11,500/- |
|---|---|
| Towards Loss of consortium and | Rs. 2,00,000/- |
| filial love and affection | |
| Towards loss of Estate | Rs. 15,000/- |
| Towards funeral expenses | Rs. 15,000/- |
| Loss of dependency | Rs. 19,15,200/- |
| TOTAL | Rs. 21,56,700/- |
| Less: awarded by Tribunal | Rs. 10,40,500/- |
| Enhancement | Rs. 11,16,200/- |
Thus, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal, there shall be an increase of Rs.11,16,200/together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated
12.06.2019 passed in MVC No.974/2016 by the Tribunal is modified by awarding enhanced compensation of
MFA No. 3685 of 2020
Rs.11,16,200/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.
(iv) The conditions of apportionment and deposit as ordered by the Tribunal remain unaltered.
(v) 1st respondent is directed to deposit the
compensation amount with interest within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order after deducting a
sum of Rs.5,000/- paid as interim compensation.
Sd/JUDGE
Sd/JUDGE
tsn* List No.: 2 Sl No.: 12
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal for death due to a motor vehicle accident was appropriate.
Whether the compensation under miscellaneous first appeal should be enhanced by the High Court.
Whether the multiplier and monthly income adopted for calculating loss of dependency were correct.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and othersRelied on¶15
Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and others, 2018 SCC ONLINE SC 1546 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Neela W/O. Late Raju
Kumari Anushree D/O. Late Raju
Master Yogesh S/O. Late Raju
Rachachari S/O Late Doddathammachar
Sarojamma W/O Rachachari
The Divisional Controller, D.O., KSRTC Rural Division
K. Somashekar
C. M. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
