The Divisional Controller v. Smt. Sharadha W/O Nagesh Devadiga

Karnataka HC28 Oct 2024MFA/100320/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this first appeal against a motor accident award, the High Court of Karnataka held that the Tribunal erred in applying a 40% future prospectus for a deceased aged 48. The Court applied a 25% rate based on Apex Court precedent, recalculated dependency loss, and reduced interest from 8% to 6% per annum. The award was modified to Rs. 22,93,062.

What did the court decide?

Part of the appeal allowed; compensation reduced to Rs. 22,93,062; interest reduced to 6% p.a.; Corporation directed to deposit within 8 weeks.

The Divisional Controller Vs Smt. Sharadha W/O… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15752-DB MFA No. 100320 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 PRESENT

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD AND

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶5

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.100320 OF 2024

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER NWKSRTC, NEW BUS STAND, P.B.ROAD, DHARWAD (BUS BEARING NO. KA-25/F-3028), REPRESENTED BY CHIEF LAW OFFICER, NWKRTC, CENTRAL OFFICE, HUBBALLI.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. S.C.BHUTI, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

SMT. SHARADHA W/O. NAGESH DEVADIGA AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, (WIFE OF THE DECEASED).

¶12

Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2024.11.07 11:07:48 +0530

¶13

NITHESHA S/O. NAGESH DEVADIGA AGE: 18 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, (SON OF DECEASED).

¶14

NISHANTHA S/O. NAGESH DEVADIGA AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, (SON OF DECEASED)

¶15

RESPONDENT NO.3 IS MINOR, REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL MOTHER AS MINOR GUARDIAN RESPONDENT NO.1.

¶16

SMT. SEETHU W/O. GOVINDA DEVADIGA AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, (MOTHER OF THE DECEASED)

¶17

ALL ARE R/O. 2-99A RAMANAGARA NADA, KUNDAPUR TALUK,

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15752-DB MFA No. 100320 of 2024

¶19

UTTAR KANNADA DISTRICT-576 201, NOW AT KAMALAPUR, DHARWAD.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI. HANAMANT R.LATUR, ADVOCATE)

¶22

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.07.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.229/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, AT DHARWAD, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.23,19,400/- WITH INTEREST AT 8 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS DEPOSIT.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)

¶27

The appellant-North West Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Corporation’, for short) has filed this appeal challenging the judgment and award dated 28.07.2023 passed by the learned IV Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Dharwad, in M.V.C. No.229/2022 whereunder the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.23,19,400/- with interest at 8% per annum and prayed for reduction of the same.

¶28

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15752-DB MFA No. 100320 of 2024

¶29

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are

¶30

referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

¶31

3. Brief facts of the claimants’ case before the Tribunal are as under:

¶32

The claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the Tribunal seeking compensation on account of death of Nagesh Devadiga, in a road traffic accident that took place on 23.11.2021 at about 5:00 p.m., when the husband of petitioner No.1 boarded the KSRTC bus bearing registration No.KA-25/F-3028 at BVB College bus stop, at that time, the driver of the bus suddenly moved the same in a rash and negligent manner and as a result, Nagesh fell down and the wheel of the bus ran over the left leg of Nagesh causing fatal injuries. He was shifted to KIMS Hospital, Hubballi and due to severe injuries Nagesh succumbed to the injuries while undergoing treatment on 24.11.2021. The deceased was aged about 45 years, doing coolie work and earning a sum of Rs.18,000/- per month.

¶33

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15752-DB MFA No. 100320 of 2024

¶34

4. After service of notice, the respondent appeared through counsel and filed objections resisting the claim and denied all averments made in the claim petition.

¶35

5. The Tribunal considering the evidence on record at Exs.P1 to P11, oral evidence of PW1 and RW1 and Ex.R1, has awarded total compensation of Rs.23,19,400/- with interest at 8% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶36

6. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment and

¶37

award, the Corporation is before this Court.

¶38

7. Learned counsel for the appellant-Corporation has contended that the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.23,19,400/-, which is on the higher side, by taking into consideration the future prospects of the deceased at 40%, as the deceased, at the time accident, was aged about 48 years and the Tribunal ought to have taken into consideration the future prospects at 25%. He further contended that the Tribunal has awarded interest on the compensation @ 8% per annum which has to be reduced to 6% per annum. He contended that, as the deceased suddenly boarded the bus at

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15752-DB MFA No. 100320 of 2024

¶40

BVB college, hence, there is also negligence on the part of the

¶41

deceased. Thus, he prays for allowing the appeal.

¶42

8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants contended that the Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased at Rs.13,650/- per month, which is on the lower side, but as per the Circular issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority as well as High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad, the notional income for the accident of the year 2021 is Rs.14,250/ per month and the same has to be taken into consideation. He further contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is just and reasonable. Hence, he prayed to grant fair compensation to the claimants.

¶43

9. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment and award, the following point that would arise for our consideration in this appeal is;

¶44

“Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for reduction?”

¶45

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15752-DB MFA No. 100320 of 2024

¶46

10. There is no dispute with regard to the occurrence of the accident on 23.11.2021. The very fact is that when the deceased was boarding the bus, the accident occurred. Hence, he sustained severe injuries and succumbed to fatal injuries. The accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the Corporation bus and the claimants have stated that, her husband-deceased was doing coolie work and was earning Rs.18,000/- per month. Apart from the oral evidence of PW-1, the claimants have not produced any proof of income of the deceased.

¶47

11. As on the date of accident the age of deceased was 48 years. But, the Tribunal committed an error by adding future prospectus at 40% on the notional income of the deceased. As per the dictum of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. -v- PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS [AIR 2017 SC 5157], for the age group between 40-50 years, 25% future prospectus to be added to the income of deceased. Therefore, considering the age of the deceased as 48 years, the year of accident 2021 and the avocation of the deceased as a coolie, his income is reassessed at Rs.14,250/- per month and 25% of his income has

¶48

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15752-DB MFA No. 100320 of 2024

¶49

to be added towards future prospects. No contra evidence is placed by the Corporation. The claimants are the wife, the children and the mother of the deceased. Therefore, 1/4^th of his income has to be deducted towards his personal expenses and 3/4^th income has to be taken towards the family contribution and the multiplier applicable to his age group is ‘13’. Therefore, the loss of dependency works out to Rs.20,84,062/-.

¶50

Rs.14,250+ Rs.3,562.5(25%)= Rs.17,812.5x3/4=13,359.375x12x13=20,84,062/-

¶51

12. A total sum of Rs.1,76,000/- is awarded towards loss of consortium (i.e. Rs.44,000/-x4) and Rs.16,500/- each towards funeral expenses and loss of estate.

¶52

13. So far as interest is concerned, the appellantCorporation has taken a contention that the Tribunal has awarded interest on the compensation at 8% per annum, which is high and exorbitant.

¶53

14. In view of the decision of the Co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court in the case of Ms.JOYEETA BOSE AND OTHERS –V- VENKATESHAN.V AND OTHERS (MFA 5896/2018

¶54

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15752-DB MFA No. 100320 of 2024

¶55

AND CONNECTED MATTERS disposed of on 24.8.2020 interest

¶56

on the compensation has to be awarded at 6% per annum. Hence, the rate of interest from awarded at 8% p.a. is reduced to 6% per annum. Thus, in all, the claimants are entitled to modified compensation as under:

¶57

Loss of dependency Rs. 20,84,062/Loss of consortium (Rs.44,000x4) Rs. 1,76,000/Loss of estate Rs. 16,500/Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/- -----------------Total Rs.22,93,062/------------------

¶58

15. Thus, the claimants are entitled to total

¶59

compensation of Rs.22,93,062/- as against Rs.23,19,400/awarded by the Tribunal.

¶60

16. In the result, we pass the following:

¶61

ORDER

¶62

The appeal filed by the appellant/Corporation is allowed in part . The judgment and award dated 28.07.2023 passed by the learned IV Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Dharwad, in M.V.C. No.229/2022 is modified to the extent that the claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.22,93,062/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till

¶63

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:15752-DB MFA No. 100320 of 2024

¶64

realization. The appellant-Corporation shall deposit the entire compensation with accrued interest before the Tribunal within eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. On deposit, the Tribunal is directed to disburse the entire compensation in favour of the claimants

¶65

as per the apportionment made by the Tribunal.

¶66

The amount in deposit by the Corporation, if any, shall

¶67

be transmitted to the Tribunal within three weeks.

¶68

Draw modified award accordingly.

¶69

Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to

¶70

the Tribunal forthwith.