Allowed

Basavalingappa v. the Division Controller

Karnataka HC29 Nov 2022MFA/8125/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court revisited the compensation quantum in a motor accident case where the deceased, a bachelor employed in agriculture and tractor maintenance, died due to a bus accident. While the dispute centered on the claimant's higher income estimate versus the Tribunal's notional income assessment, the Court recalculated the award based on guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Enhancement of compensation by Rs. 6,16,400 with interest at 6% p.a., directing the respondent to deposit the amount within four weeks.

Basavalingappa Vs the Division Controller — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

MFA No. 8125 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. M. JOSHI

¶9

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8125 OF 2018 (MV-D)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

Digitally signed by T S NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

BASAVALINGAPPA. S/O LATE LAKKAPPA

¶13

NOW AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

¶14

NAGARATHNAMMA W/O BASAVALINGAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS

¶15

DELEEP H B. S/O BASAVALINGAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS

¶16

ALL ARE R/A HOSAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT, NOW R/A C/O NARASEGOWDA S/O THIMMAPPA, SAMUDRANAHALLI, KASABA HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK.

¶17

…APPELLANTS

¶18

(BY SRI. RAGHU R., ADVOCATE)

¶19

¶20

MFA No. 8125 of 2018

¶21

AND:

¶22

THE DIVISION CONTROLLER KSRTC, HASSAN DIVISION, HASSAN SERVICE ADDRESS: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC, TUMAKURU DIVISION ASHOKA ROAD, TUMAKURU.

¶23

…RESPONDENT

¶24

(BY SMT. S NIRMALA, ADVOCATE)

¶25

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.07.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.728/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MACT, TUMAKURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION

¶26

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, C.M.JOSHI J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

By the consent of learned counsel appearing for both the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal though it is posted for orders.

¶29

Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 28.07.2018 passed in MVC No.728/2017 by the learned II Additional District Judge and MACT, Tumakuru, whereby the petition filed by the petitioners came to be allowed in part and awarded a sum of Rs.9,22,000/- together with interest at 6%

¶30

¶31

MFA No. 8125 of 2018

¶32

p.a., as compensation, petitioners/appellants herein have filed this appeal urging various grounds.

¶33

The parties are referred to as per their nomenclature

¶34

before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶35

The brief facts of the case are as below:

¶36

That on 22-4-2017 at about 12.00 p.m. one H.B. Revanna @ Revannaswamy was proceeding on his motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KA.20.K.4951 towards Hosahalli from Rangapura on Tiptur-Rangapura road and when he reached Shankareshwara Nagara on Tiptur -Rangapura road, KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA.13.F.1496 came from Tiptur side driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle in which Revanna was proceeding and caused the accident. Due to which, Revanna sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. Immediately, dead body of deceased Revanna was shifted to General Hospital, Tiptur, where postmortem was conducted and handed over the dead body to the petitioners and thereafter, they have conducted funeral ceremony by spending Rs.1,00,000/-. It was further

¶37

¶38

MFA No. 8125 of 2018

¶39

contended that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA.13.F-1496 and Tiptur Rural Police have registered a case in Cr.No.54/2017.

¶40

It was the further case of the petitioners that, prior to the accident, deceased was hale and healthy and was aged about 32 years, doing agricultural work and maintaining the affairs of JCB and Tractor/Trailers which was standing in the name of petitioner No.2 and earning Rs.40,000/- per month and maintaining his family. Due to his untimely death, petitioners have suffered mental shock and agony apart from loss of dependency. Therefore, they claimed compensation of Rs.60,00,000/-.

¶41

On receipt of summons from the Tribunal, respondent entered appearance through its counsel and filed objections denying the entire averments made in the petition and contending that on 22-4-2017 at 12.15 p.m. the driver of the bus stopped at Shankareshwara nagar bus stop to lift the passengers the said Revanna (deceased) came from opposite direction in motor cycle in a rash and negligent manner by overtaking

¶42

¶43

MFA No. 8125 of 2018

¶44

another vehicle and dashed to the right side of KSRTC bus and due to which, he sustained grievous injuries and died at the spot.

¶45

It was further contended that the accident was not due to the rash and negligent driving of KSRTC bus and denied the age, income and occupation of the deceased. It was further contended that the respondent had already paid an amount of Rs.50,000/to the petitioners immediately after the accident as an interim compensation and requested to deduct the said amount from the final compensation to be awarded. Therefore, prayed to dismiss the claim petition.

¶46

On the basis of the pleadings and contentions of the parties, the Tribunal has framed necessary issues for its consideration. Before the Tribunal, 1st petitioner got examined himself as PW1 and marked Exs.P1 to P11 and on the other hand, respondent got examined one witness as RW1 and marked one document as Ex.R1.

¶47

On hearing both the sides and considering the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal after assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.9,500/- per month,

¶48

¶49

MFA No. 8125 of 2018

¶50

deducting 50% towards personal expenses and applying Multiplier

¶51

of 16 taking the age of the deceased calculated the loss of dependency at Rs.9,12,000/- and allowed the petition in part and awarded a sum of Rs.9,22,000/- under different heads as below:

¶52

Love and affection	Rs. 40,000/-
Transportation and funeral expenses	Rs. 20,000/-
Loss of dependency	Rs.9,12,000/-
Total	Rs.9,72,000/-
Less interim compensation	Rs. 50,000/- Rs.9,22,000/-

¶53

Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have approached this Court in this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶54

Respondent has appeared in pursuant to the notice issued by this Court.

¶55

We have heard learned counsel Sri Raghu R., appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel Smt. S. Nirmala, appearing for the respondent.

¶56

The fact that there was an accident involving the bus belonging to the respondent is not in dispute. The petitioners

¶57

¶58

MFA No. 8125 of 2018

¶59

have disputed the quantum of compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal. The petitioners contend that the deceased Revanna was unmarried and he was doing agriculture and maintaining the affairs of JCB and tractors which were standing in the name of the 2nd petitioner. Therefore, they claim that he was earning Rs.40,000/- per month. The B extract of JCB/Tractor trailer are at Exs.P10 and P11. The Tribunal felt that notional income has to be considered in the absence of proof of income and presumed the income at Rs.9,500/- per month and proceeded to award the compensation under the head of loss of dependency. Obviously, it did not consider the future prospects.

¶60

The guidelines issued by KSLSA for the purpose of settlement before the Loka Adalaths indicate that the notional income for the year 2017 is Rs.11,000/- per month. We do not see any reason to deviate from the same as it also takes into account the wages under the Minimum Wages Act. Hence, adding 40% of the said notional income towards future prospects, the effective multiplicand comes to Rs.11,000/- + 4,400/- = 15,400/-. Since the deceased was bachelor, 50% has to be deducted towards persons expenses. Hence, the compensation

¶61

¶62

MFA No. 8125 of 2018

¶63

under the head of loss of dependency is calculated as: Rs.7,700/-

¶64

x 12 x 16 = 14,78,400/- by adopting the multiplier of 16.

¶65

Petitioners No. 1 and 2 are the parents of the deceased. Petitioner No.3 cannot be considered for loss of filial love and affection and therefore, the compensation under the head of loss of filial love and affection is awarded at Rs.40,000/- each to the petitioners No. 1 and 2. The petitioners are also entitled for a sum of Rs.15,000/- each under the head of loss of estate and funeral expenses.

¶66

Thus, the compensation is re-assessed as below:

¶67

Love and affection		Rs. 80,000/-
Transportation and	funeral	Rs. 30,000/-
expenses
Loss of dependency		Rs.14,78,400/-
Total		Rs.15,88,400/-
Less interim compensation		Rs. 50,000/- Rs.15,38,400/-
Less: awarded by Tribunal		Rs. 9,22,000/-
Enhancement		Rs. 6,16,400/-

¶68

Thus, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal,

¶69

there shall be an increase of Rs.6,16,400/- together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.

¶70

¶71

MFA No. 8125 of 2018

¶72

Hence, we pass the following:

¶73

ORDER

¶74

(i) The appeal is allowed in part.

¶75

(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 28.07.2018

¶76

passed in MVC No.728/2017 by the Tribunal is modified awarding enhanced compensation of Rs.6,16,400/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.

¶77

(iii) The conditions of apportionment and deposit as ordered by the Tribunal remain unaltered.

¶78

(iv) Respondent-KSRTC is directed to deposit the

¶79

compensation amount with interest within four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

¶80

Sd/JUDGE

¶81

Sd/JUDGE

¶82

tsn* List No.: 2 Sl No.: 4

Basavalingappa v. the Division Controller

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Basavalingappa v. the Division Controller

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Chief Secretary Vs Smt. S Girija

The Chief Secretary Vs P M Sridhara

P M Sridhara Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Sri. M. Krishna Murthy Vs Sri. K.N. Gopal Krishna

State of Karnataka Vs Gangadhar

Smt Lalithamma Vs Sri Sanjeev Murthy