Partly allowed

Smt.Mayawwa W/O Rama Shiragure v. the Divisional Manager

Karnataka HC2 Apr 2024MFA/103578/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross appeals by claimants and NWKRTC over quantum of fatal accident compensation for a pedestrian killed by a bus. Court recalculated dependency using KSLSA notional income chart, added 40% future prospects, revised conventional heads per Pranay Sethi and Magma, reduced interest to 6%, and apportioned award.

What did the court decide?

Compensation modified to Rs.9,93,250 with 6% p.a. interest; 25% each to mother and two children; wife's disputed 25% in fixed deposit until civil court decides marital status; part amounts received to

Smt.Mayawwa W/O Rama Shiragure Vs the Divisional… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

¶3

DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF APRIL, 2024 PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103578 OF 2015

¶9

C/W

¶10

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102081 OF 2015 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103007 OF 2015

¶11

IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103578 OF 2015

¶12

BETWEEN:

¶13

SMT. MAYAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶14

SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O BALAPPA SHIRAGURE AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: NIL R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶15

VISHAL

¶16

NINGAPPA PATTIHAL

¶17

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2024.04.24 16:42:24 +0530

¶18

(BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA A MALI, ADVOCATE)

¶19

AND:

¶20

…APPELLANTS

¶21

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER NWKRTC, BELAGAVI.

¶22

SMT.LAKKAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶23

KUMARI DEEPA D/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶24

¶25

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶26

KUMAR AMASIDDA S/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶27

(SINCE R3 & R4 ARE MINORS R/BY NEXT FRIEND NATURAL MOTHER I.E., RESPONDENT NO.2 SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE)

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI. M K SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SRI. VITTHAL S TELI, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5)

¶30

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.03.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.177/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT-I AND MEMBER ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM TRIBUNAL BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶31

IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102081 OF 2015

¶32

BETWEEN:

¶33

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER NWKRTC, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, BELAGAVI-590016.

¶34

R/BY CHIEF LAW OFFICER, NWKRTC GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI-580030.

¶35

…APPELLANT

¶36

(BY SRI. M K SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE)

¶37

AND:

¶38

SMT. MAYAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG-591317, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶39

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶40

SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O BALAPPA SHIRAGURE AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAGH-591317, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶41

SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAGH-591317, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶42

KUMARI DEEPA D/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAGH-591317, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶43

KUMAR AMASIDDA S/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAGH-591317, DIST: BELAGAVI. (R4 & R5 ARE MINORS R/BY R3 AS N/G)

¶44

…RESPONDENTS

¶45

(BY SRI. RAMACHANDRA A MALI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2, SRI. VITTHAL S TELI, ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5)

¶46

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.03.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.177/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT-I AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM TRIBUNAL BELAGAVI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS. 10,83,000/- WTH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION.

¶47

IN MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103007 OF 2015

¶48

BETWEEN:

¶49

SMT. LAKKAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE/HOUSEHOLD WORK,

¶50

KUMARI DEEPA D/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,

¶51

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶52

KUMAR AMASIDDA S/O RAMA SHIRAGURE

¶53

AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,

¶54

APPELLANT NO. 2 & 3 MINOR R/BY APPELLANT NO.1 NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER

¶55

ALL ARE R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶56

…APPELLANTS

¶57

(BY SRI. VITTHAL S TELI, ADVOCATE)

¶58

AND:

¶59

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER NWKRTC, BELAGAVI.

¶60

SMT.MAYAWWA W/O RAMA SHIRAGURE AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, PRESENTLY CALLED HERSELF AS SMT.MAYAWWA W/O BALLAPPA KARAGAVI R/O:BADAMI KHEDI, CHINCHALLI VILLAGE, RAIBAG.

¶61

SMT.LAKKAWWA W/O BALAPPA SHIRAGURE AGE: 66 YEARS, OCC: NIL, RESPONDENT NO 2 AND 3 R/O: ALAGAWADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.

¶62

…RESPONDENTS

¶63

(BY SRI. M K SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SRI. RAMACHANDRA A MALI, ADVOCATE FOR R2 & R3)

¶64

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.03.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.177/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT-I AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIM TRIBUNAL BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶65

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, UMESH M. ADIGA, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶66

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶67

JUDGMENT

¶68

These appeals are filed by the claimants as well as NorthWest Karnataka Road Transportation Corporation (for short, ‘Corporation’), Belagavi, challenging the impugned judgment and award passed by the Fast Track Court-I and Addl. MACT, Belagavi (for short, ‘Tribunal’), in MVC No.177/2009 dated 13.03.2015.

¶69

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per the rankings before the Tribunal.

¶70

It is the case of claimants that on 11.11.2008 at about 1.30 p.m., one Rama was going as pedestrian at Harugeri-Athani road. When he reached Harugeri, he met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the bus belonging to the Corporation, bearing registration No.KA-23/F462 by its driver. As a result of which, Rama sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries at the spot.

¶71

It is the further case of the claimants that Smt. Mayavva and Smt. Lakkawwa claims to be the wives of Late Rama. Petitioner No.2 is mother and respondent Nos.3 and 4 are children of Late Rama. The deceased was aged about 32

¶72

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶73

years and he was doing centering work and earning Rs.6,000/p.m. It is also contended that he was an agriculturist and earning Rs.1,00,000/- p.a. The claimants were depending upon the income of the deceased. With these reasons, they prayed to award compensation of Rs.12,00,000/-. It appears that respondent Nos.2 to 4 were got impleaded during course of trial before Tribunal.

¶74

The respondent No.1 in written statement denied all the contentions of the claimants and it has further stated that accident took place due to negligence of the deceased. Therefore, prayed to reject the claim petition.

¶75

From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal has framed necessary issues.

¶76

Claimants to prove their contentions have examined PW-1 to PW-3 and got marked Exs.P-1 to P-46. It appears that PW-1 did not offer for further evidence and cross-examination and her evidence was discarded by the Tribunal. Respondent No.2 was partly examined as PW-2. The said mistake was corrected and she was examined as RW-1 by discarding her

¶77

¶78

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶79

evidence as PW-2. Respondents have examined RW-1 to RW-3 and got marked Ex.R-1.

¶80

The Tribunal after hearing both the parties and appreciating the evidence on record, assessed the age of the deceased as 37 years, his income as Rs.4,500/- p.m., applied multiplier as 15, deducted 1/4^th of the income towards the personal expenses and awarded compensation under the head loss of dependency. Considering the facts of the case, Tribunal

¶81

in total awarded compensation of Rs.10,82,500/- as under :

¶82

1.	Loss of dependency	Rs.6,07,500/-
2.	Loss of consortium	Rs.1,00,000/-
3.	Loss of filial love and affection	Rs.50,000/-
4.	Loss of love and affection	Rs.2,00,000/-
5.	Loss of estate	Rs.1,00,000/-
6.	Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses	Rs.25,000/-
	Total	Rs.10,82,500/-
	Rounded off to	Rs.10,83,000/-

¶83

Aggrieved by the said judgment and award, both

¶84

the claimants as well as Corporation have filed aforesaid appeals, challenging quantum of compensation awarded.

¶85

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶86

We have heard arguments of the learned Advocates for both the sides.

¶87

Learned Advocate for NWKRTC submits that claimants were unable to prove the income of the deceased. The Tribunal has taken notional income of the deceased as Rs.4,500/-. But according to the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority notional income of the victims of an accident of the year 2008 is Rs.4,250/- p.m. which needs to be recalculated. He further submits that the Tribunal has generously awarded compensation under other heads. The law laid down in the case of National Insurance

¶88

Co. Ltd., vs. Pranay Sethi and others¹ has not been followed . Further, the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 9% p.a. Hence, prayed to allow the appeal filed by the Corporation.

¶89

Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 submits that respondent No.2 is the first wife of the deceased, which is admitted by PW-3. Therefore, the said evidence has to be accepted and on that basis and she should be considered as the

¶90

1 2017 ACJ 2700

¶91

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶92

first wife of the deceased. He further submits that the Tribunal has considered both the claimant No.1 and respondent No.2 as wives of Rama and awarded compensation, which is erroneous. Petitioner No.1 is not the wife of deceased. In Ex.P-41-the voters list, her real husband’s name and surname are mentioned differently other than her name mentioned. To claim compensation she is contending that she is wife of deceased. She is not at all related to the deceased Rama and not entitled for any amount of compensation.

¶93

The learned Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 4 further submits that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of loss of dependency is meager which needs to be enhanced. The Tribunal has not considered future prospects of the deceased. As per the case of Pranay Sethi (referred supra) 40% of his income has to be added as future prospects and on that basis, compensation needs to be recalculated.

¶94

The learned counsel for claimant No.1-Smt. Mayawwa, submits that PW3 in her cross-examination submits that both Mayawwa as well as Lakkawwa are her daughter-in-

¶95

10 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶96

laws. Said admission is sufficient to believe that claimant No.1 is wife of Rama and she is the first wife. She further submits that Ex.P8 – the survivor certificate supports her contention that she is the legally wedded wife of deceased Rama. The Tribunal considered these facts and rightly awarded the compensation and apportioned the amount of compensation. It does not call for any interference. He further submits that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side which needs to be enhanced.

¶97

We have gone through the entire materials available on record. It is not in serious dispute that age of the deceased was 37 years, which is mentioned in the postmortem report. The claimants have not produced legally acceptable evidence to prove that deceased was earning Rs.6,000/- per month or Rs.4,500/- per month. The Tribunal assessed the notional income of the deceased as Rs.4,500/- per month, which appears to be on higher side. The Karnataka Legal Services Authority has prepared a chart of notional income in consultation with the stakeholders. According to the said schedule, notional income of a victim of an accident of the year

¶98

11 -

¶99

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶100

2008 is Rs.4,250/-, same could be applied to the facts of the present case.

¶101

The Tribunal has not considered future prospects of the deceased. He was aged about 37 years at the time of accident. Therefore, 40% of his income has to be added towards future prospects. It is not in dispute that the suitable multiplier applicable to the facts of this case is 15. Deceased married person having two children and mother. Therefore, 1/4^th of his income has to be deducted towards personal expenses which is rightly considered by the Tribunal. On the basis of the above said facts, the compensation under the head loss of dependency is to be recalculated.

¶102

The Tribunal has awarded compensation under conventional heads. They are on higher side. As per the law laid down in the case of Pranay Sethi (referred supra) reasonable amount of compensation needs to be awarded under the conventional heads.

¶103

Claimant Nos.1 and 2 are contending that they are wives of the deceased. Without expressing any opinion in this regard, even if we consider that they are wives, then both of

¶104

12 -

¶105

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶106

them together are entitled for the compensation under the head loss of consortium. The other claimants i.e., claimant No.2 and respondent Nos.3 and 4 are mother and children of deceased respectively and each of them are entitled for loss of consortium at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per person, as held in

¶107

Magma General Insurance Company Limited v. Nanu Ram

¶108

@ Chuhru Ram and Others² .

¶109

For the aforesaid discussion, following amount of

¶110

compensation is awarded.

¶111

1	Loss of dependency (4,250 X 12 X 15+40%-¼)	8,03,250/-
2	Loss of consortium(Rs.40,000 X 4)	Rs.1,60,000/-
3	Loss of estate	Rs.15,000/-
4	Loss of funeral expenses	Rs.15,000/-
	Total	Rs.9,93,250/-

¶112

The Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 9%

¶113

on the compensation amount per annum which is on higher side. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the Corporation and it should be at the rate of 6% per annum.

¶114

There is serious dispute between claimant Nos.1 and respondent No.2 regarding their marital status with the

¶115

2 (2018) 18 SCC 130

¶116

13 -

¶117

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶118

deceased Rama. This is summary trial proceedings and in the said summary trial proceedings, seriously disputed relationship between the parties cannot be decided. Both of them have to get it declared from competent Civil Court. Therefore, the amount of compensation needs to be apportioned in their favour has to be deposited in the fixed deposit till they settle the dispute in the Civil Court. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 4 that claimant No.1 has already received the partial compensation from the Tribunal and she be directed to redeposit the same. Since relationship of claimant No.1 and respondent No.2 as wife of deceased Rama is in serious dispute, issue of such direction to both claimant No.1 and respondent No.2 is necessary. Accordingly, claimant No.1 as well as respondent No.2 are directed to redeposit the part amount of compensation already received by them before the Tribunal, which shall be kept in the fixed deposit.

¶119

For the aforesaid discussion, we pass the following:

¶120

ORDER

¶121

(i) MFA No.103578/2015, MFA No.102081/2015 and

¶122

MFA No.103007/2015 are allowed in part.

¶123

14 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6046-DB MFA No. 103578 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 102081 of 2015, MFA No. 103007 of 2015

¶124

(ii) The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.177/2009 dated 13.03.2015 by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court – I & Addl. MACT, Belagavi, is modified.

¶125

(a) The claimants are entitled for the compensation of Rs.9,93,250/as against Rs.10,83,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶126

(b) The said amount of compensation is apportioned in the ratio of 25% each to claimant No.2 and respondent Nos.3 and 4. Remaining 25% of compensation shall be payable to legally wedded wife of Rama, which is in serious dispute in this case, between claimant No.1 and respondent No.2. The said amount shall be kept in fixed deposit in the name of Court, till the said dispute is settled between the parties on adjudication by the competent Court.

¶127

(c) Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are minors. The amount of compensation awarded to them shall be kept in fixed deposit till they attain the age of majority.

¶128

(d) Respondent–Corporation shall deposit the said amount within a period of six weeks from the

¶129