Cross appeals in a fatal motor accident claim where a youth died falling from a boarding BMTC bus. The court upheld the Tribunal's negligence finding against the bus driver, recomputed compensation using notional income of Rs.25,000 for a B.E. graduate per Kandasami, and enhanced compensation to Rs.38,83,000.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:48701-DB MFA No.5917/2021 C/W MFA No.3677/2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5917/2021 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3677/2020 (MV-D)
IN M.F.A. No.5917/2021:
BETWEEN:
SMT. PANCHAVARUNAM W/O RAVI AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS R/AT NO.33/8, NORTH STREET GANDHI KIRAMAN, GUDALUR UTHAMAPALAYAM TALUK GUDALUR, TEHNI DISTRICT TAMILNADU-625518.
…APPELLANT
Digitally signed by K S RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka
(BY SRI. A.S. GIRISH, ADV.,)
AND:
NC: 2024:KHC:48701-DB MFA No.5917/2021 C/W MFA No.3677/2020
PERIYAKULAM TALUK THENI DISTRICT TAMILNADU-625602
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. H.R. RENUKA, ADV., FOR R1 R2 SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE ENTIRE RECORDS FROM THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE XVIII ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES & MACT, BENGALURU IN MVC NO.1034/2019 AND AFTER PERUSING THE RECRODS, ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AWARDED BY THE COURT BELOW ON DATED 30.11.2019 IN MVC NO.1034/2019 AND MODIFY THE AWARD ACCORDINGLY AND FURTHER GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEF'S AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN M.F.A. NO.3677/2020:
BETWEEN:
BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION SARIGE BHAVAN, K H ROAD SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE 560027 BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR REP. BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER.
…APPELLANT
(BY SMT. H.R. RENUKA, ADV.,)
AND:
NC: 2024:KHC:48701-DB MFA No.5917/2021 C/W MFA No.3677/2020
S/O MOKKARAJTHEVAR ADULT, NO.61/16, WARD NO.6 PERUNGAYATHEVAR STREET DEVADANAPATTI, PERIYAKUDAM TALUK TEHNI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU 625602
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. A.S. GIRISH, ADV., FOR SRI. K.V. PRABHAKAR GOWDA, ADV., FOR R1 R2 SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1034/2019 BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU CITY, CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE CLAIM PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
ORAL JUDGMENT
( PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL)
Challenging the award in MVC No.1034/2019 on the file
of the 18th Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes and MACT, Bengaluru, the claimant has preferred MFA No.5917/2021 and Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC), the owner of the bus has preferred MFA No.3677/2020.
respondent in MVC No.1034/2019. For the purpose of convenience, the parties are referred to henceforth according to their ranks before the Tribunal.
he did not hold the grips in the bus so he fell down from the middle door of the bus and came under the left back wheel of the bus. The age, occupation, income of the deceased and its liability to pay the compensation were denied.
of Rs.25,26,000/- on different heads as follows:
| Sl. No. |
Particulars | Compensation awarded in Rs. |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Loss of dependency | 24,20,000/- |
| 2. | Loss of consortium | 80,000/- |
| 3. | Towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses |
15,000/- |
| 4. | Loss of estate | 15,000/- |
| 5. | Ambulance bill | 26,000/- |
| TOTAL | 25,56,000/- |
Submissions of Smt.H.R.Renuka, learned counsel for the respondent - BMTC:
tried to board the running bus even before the same was stopped. Therefore, he himself was responsible for the accident and that is evident from Ex.P3. As per the evidence adduced by the claimant herself, the monthly salary of the deceased was Rs.16,000/-. His bank statements were not produced to show that he was earning additional income of Rs.9000/- by doing other work. Therefore, the income assessed is on the higher side. The compensation awarded on the other heads is also on the higher side. As per the claimant herself, respondent No.2 had deserted his wife and son. Therefore, no compensation should have been awarded to him under the head of loss of consortium.
Submissions of Sri.A.S.Girish, learned counsel for the claimant :
the bus was the tort-feasor. He did not step into the witness box to deny the negligence and impute the same to the claimant. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in imputing the negligence to the driver of the bus. The Supreme Court in Kandasami and others Vs. Linda Briyal and another1 has notionally assessed the income of a B.E. graduate at Rs.25,000/- p.m. Therefore, the compensation assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Income at minimum Rs.25,000/has to be considered. The Tribunal ought to have given escalation on the compensation awarded under the heads of consortium and loss of estate as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company
Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others2 .
the points that arise for our consideration are:
1 Civil Appeal No.3125/2023 dt. 24.4.23
2 2017 (16) SCC 680
NC: 2024:KHC:48701-DB MFA No.5917/2021 C/W MFA No.3677/2020
ANALYSIS
Reg. Negligence:
under the rare left wheel of the bus and died due to those injuries. Relying on Ex.P3, an attempt was made to contend that the victim tried to board the bus even before the same came to a halt. But, RW-1, the conductor of the bus in the cross examination admits that the bus had stopped near KEB Quarters bus stop to enable the passengers to board the bus. He further admits that the bus had an automatic door that does not open when bus is moving. He further admits that in such cases, unless the conductor gives signal to the driver bus cannot move. He admits that in such buses passengers cannot board the bus after the door is closed. That itself falsifies the defence that Ajith Kumar tried to board the bus even before that was stopped.
negligence of the driver of the bus can be labelled as perverse or illegal.
Reg. Quantum:
comes to Rs.25,000/- + 10,000 (40%) = Rs.35,000/-. As the deceased was a bachelor, in view of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another3 , 50% has to be deducted towards his personal expenses. Therefore, his contribution to the family comes to (35,000 x 1/2) Rs.17,500/p.m. Applicable multiplier is 18. Therefore, the compensation payable under the head of loss of dependency is (17,500 x 12 x 18) Rs.37,80,000/-.
Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi's case referred to supra , claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.40,000/- with escalation of 10% under the head of loss of consortium, Rs.15,000/- each with escalation of 10% under the heads of loss of estate and funeral expenses. The evidence on record shows that the claimant hails from Tamil Nadu and the dead 3 (2009) 6 SCC 121
NC: 2024:KHC:48701-DB MFA No.5917/2021 C/W MFA No.3677/2020
body was transported to his native place in Tamil Nadu. Therefore, the compensation awarded towards ambulance charges needs to be maintained. Therefore, the just
compensation payable to the claimant is as follows:
| Sl. No. |
Particulars | Compensation awarded in Rs. |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | Loss of dependency | 37,80,000 |
| 2. | Loss of consortium | 44,000/- |
| 3. | Towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses |
16,500/- |
| 4. | Loss of estate | 16,500/- |
| 5. | Ambulance bill | 26,000/- |
| TOTAL | 38,83,000/- | |
| Awarded by the Tribunal | 25,56,000/- | |
| Enhanced compensation | 13,27,000/- |
liable to be dismissed and MFA No.5917/2021 deserves to be allowed-in-part. Hence the following:
ORDER
ii. MFA No.5917/2021 is hereby allowed-in-part.
iii. Claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of
Rs.13,27,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.
iv. Respondent No.1 shall deposit the entire compensation awarded on adjusting the amount already
deposited if any, before the Tribunal within six weeks from the date of receipt copy of this order.
v. On such deposit, the Tribunal shall release 50% of the amount to the claimant and balance 50% shall be deposited in her name in any Nationalised Bank or Scheduled Bank of her choice for a period of 3 years.
vi. Amount in deposit, if any and the TCRs shall be transmitted to the Tribunal.
Sd/(K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE
Sd/(VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE
RV
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the accident causing death of Ajith Kumar was due to actionable negligence of the BMTC bus driver?
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was just and required enhancement?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kandasami and others Vs. Linda Briyal and anotherFollowed¶13
Civil Appeal No.3125/2023 dt. 24.4.23
National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & OthersFollowed¶14
2017 (16) SCC 680 · Who else cites this
Sarla Verma and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and anotherFollowed¶14
(2009) 6 SCC 121 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Panchavarunam
Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation (BMTC)
Ravi
K.S. Mudagal
Vijaykumar A. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
