The Divisional Controller Ksrtc Vs Kumari R J Kavya

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:05.09.2022 PASSED IN MVC No.1429/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, ARSIKERE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.14,60,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.

¶33

IN MFA No. 4382/2023

¶34

BETWEEN:

¶35

KUMARI R J KAVYA D/O JAYANNA AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS. R/AT RAMPURA KANAKATTE HOBLI ARSIKERE TALUK – 573 103.

¶36

JAYANNA

¶37

S/O LATE BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

¶38

R/AT RAMPURA

¶39

3 -

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶42

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶43

KANAKATTE HOBLI ARSIKERE – 573 103

¶44

…APPELLANTS

¶45

(BY SRI JAGADEESH H T, ADVOCATE)

¶46

AND:

¶47

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC CHIKKAMAGALUR DIVISION CHIKKAMAGALUR.

¶48

…RESPONDENT

¶49

(BY SRI DABALI FAKKIRAPPA SHIDRAMAPPA, ADVOCATE-) V. K NOT FILED )

¶50

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:05.09.2022 PASSED IN MVC No.1429/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, ARSIKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLIAM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶51

THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶52

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶53

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶54

MFA No.2103/2023 is filed by the corporation –

¶55

KSRTC challenging liability and quantum of compensation and MFA No.4382/2023 is filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded in the judgment

¶56

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶59

and award dated 05.09.2022 passed in MVC

¶60

No.1429/2019 by Senior Civil Judge and MACT., Arasikere.

¶61

2. The claimants made a claim petition praying to award compensation for the death of Rathnamma, (Claimant No.1 is a daughter and claimant No.2 is husband) in a road traffic accident occurred on 04.02.2018 contending that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of KSRTC bus bearing registration No.KA18/F-0788. The Tribunal after recording the evidence, appreciating the evidence on record has assessed the compensation and awarded compensation under various

¶62

heads as under:

¶63

A	Loss of dependency	14,00,000/-
B	Funeral expenses and transportation of dead body	25,000/-
C	Loss of consortium	40,000/-
D	Loss of love and affection	20,000/-
E	Loss of Estate	25,000/-
	Total	Rs.15,10,000/-

¶64

3. The Tribunal has also awarded interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till

¶65

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶66

HC-KAR

¶67

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶68

realization and directed the appellant -Corporation to pay the award amount with interest. The Corporation has challenged it’s liability and also quantum of compensation. Claimants have also filed appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

¶69

4. Heard learned counsel for the Corporation and

¶70

learned counsel for claimants.

¶71

5. Learned counsel for Corporation would contend that Ex.P5 - sketch clearly indicate that the accident occurred on the road on its left side from which the bus was moving and Ex.P5-sketch and Ex.P4- spot mahazar indicate presence of tyre/brake marks on the road, which indicate the negligence on the part of the deceased also and the Tribunal has failed to consider the same. The driver of the bus applied brake and tried to avoid accident. The deceased who was moving on the other side of the

¶72

road on a two wheeler has crossed the road and it clearly indicates that she is also negligent and contributed to the

¶73

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶74

HC-KAR

¶75

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶76

accident. He further contends that PW.1 has stated the age of the deceased as 50 years. The Aadhar card of the deceased is sought to be produced under I.A.No.1/2024 filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC by the appellantCorporation also indicate that the deceased was aged 50 years as on the date of accident as her date of birth mentioned in it is 01.01.1968. The Tribunal erred in taking the age of the deceased as 45 years based on Ex.P7 – post mortem report. Considering the age of the deceased as 50 years, the multiplier applicable is 13. He further submits that funeral expenses and loss of estate awarded in sum of Rs.25,000/- each is on higher side. With this, he prayed to allow the appeal filed by the Corporation.

¶77

6. Learned counsel for claimants would contend that

¶78

the charge sheet has been filed against the driver of the bus and considering the same, the Tribunal has rightly held that the sole liability is on the Corporation since the driver drove the bus in rash and negligent manner and for

¶79

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶80

HC-KAR

¶81

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶82

that the driver has been charge sheeted. The Tribunal based on P.M. report has rightly taken the age of the deceased as 45 years and rightly applied multiplier 14. He further submits that the claimant was a home maker apart from doing coolie work and as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of S h ishu Pal @ Shish Ram & Ors. v. Surjeet & Ors (2026 INSC 634 ) in the case of death of a home maker, the loss of domestic care in sum of Rs.30,000/- is to be taken and apart from that, the established income of deceased is to be added to the said income. He further submits that the claimants are husband and daughter of the deceased who are entitled to consortium in a sum of Rs.40,000/- each and the Tribunal has erred in only awarding consortium in a sum of Rs.40,000/- apart from awarding loss of love and affection in a sum of Rs.20,000/-. With this he prayed to allow the appeal filed by the claimants.

¶83

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶84

HC-KAR

¶85

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶86

7. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has

¶87

perused the judgment, award and trial Court records. The following points arise for consideration:

¶88

(i) Whether there is any contributory negligence on the part of the deceased?

¶89

(ii) Whether the age taken by the Tribunal of the deceased is proper?

¶90

(iii) Whether there are any grounds for enhancement of compensation?

¶91

Re. Point No.1

¶92

8. The accident occurred on 04.12.2018. The

¶93

deceased was travelling as a pillion rider on the bike of first claimant bearing Regn.No.KA.13/X-8194 and time of accident is 07.45 AM. The first claimant stopped her bike on the side of the road and was talking over mobile phone. At that time, the deceased got down from the bike and

¶94

was standing on the foot path. At that time, KSRTC bus bearing Regn.No.KA.18/F-0788 dashed against the

¶95

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶96

HC-KAR

¶97

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶98

deceased. As a result, she sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The charge sheet-Ex.P3 has been filed against the driver of the bus for negligent driving of the bus and causing the accident. Ex.P4 is the mahazar of the spot of accident and Ex.P5 is the sketch. Ex.P4 and P5 indicate that the bike on which the deceased was pillion rider came from Kadur side towards Panchanahalli and the bus was driven from Panchanahalli towards Kadur on its left side. The spot of the accident is shown on the left side on which the bus was moving. The said spot of the accident is not on the footpath, but it is on the left side of the road on which the bus was moving. Both Exs.P4 and P5 indicate tyre/brake marks on the road prior to and subsequent to the spot of accident. The said tyre/brake marks clearly indicate that the driver of the bus applied brake in order to avoid the accident. The same indicate that the deceased suddenly came on the road. The said aspect clearly indicates the negligence on the part of the deceased and she has contributed to the

¶99

10 - NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶100

HC-KAR

¶101

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶102

accident. Considering the said aspect, the contributory negligence on the part of deceased is assessed at 50% and the contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the bus is assessed at 50%. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered.

¶103

Re. Point No.2

¶104

9. PW.1 has stated in her chief-examination that her mother - deceased Rathnamma was aged 50 years as on the date of accident. The Tribunal ignoring the same, has taken the age of the deceased based on Ex.P7 - P.M.report as 45 years. Now the Corporation has filed copy of the Aadhar card along with the application under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC. As per the said Aadhar card, the date of birth of the deceased Rathnamma is 01.01.1968. The date

¶105

of accident is 04.12.2018. As on the date of accident, the deceased was aged 50 years 11 months. Therefore, based on the said document and also evidence of PW.1, the age of the deceased is to be taken as 50 years. The appellant

¶106

NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶107

11 -

¶108

HC-KAR

¶109

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶110

has also made out a case for production of the said copy of the Aadhar card of the deceased as sought in I.A.No.1/2024. Therefore, I.A.No.1 deserves to be allowed and it is allowed. The said Aadhar Card corroborates the evidence of PW.1 with regard to age stated by PW.1 in her chief-examination i.e. 50 years. Therefore, the age of the deceased is to be taken as 50 years. Accordingly, point No.2 is answered.

¶111

Re. Point No.3

¶112

10. Deceased Rathnamma was mother of claimant No.1 and wife of claimant No.2. Considering the said aspect, she is a home maker. She is married and taking care of her husband and her daughter. Claimant No.1 daughter was aged about 21 years at the time of the accident. Claimant No.2 - husband of the deceased was aged about 48 years. In the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the claimants in the case of Shishupal ( supra ), the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:

¶113

12 -

¶114

HC-KAR

¶115

NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶116

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶117

Loss Of Domestic Care: An Additional Head

¶118

20. It is in these circumstances, that we deem it appropriate to direct that when a Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal or the High Court or this Court is concerned with or a case involving the death of a homemaker, in order to overcome the inherent disadvantage accrued against the homemaker on a calculation of compensation on the basis of conservatively computed notional income and while being acutely aware of the dictum in Pranay Sethi (supra) regarding loss of consortium as also the disposition towards uniformity, that for the three major heads (the homemaker’s contribution towards smooth functioning of the household, the loss of maternal support for children and loss of spousal support/the support and care of their child who is an adult, for the parents of the deceased) discussed in the foregoing paragraphs, a composite sum of Rs.30,000/- shall be added under the head of ‘loss of domestic care’, provided that all three of these heads are met in the given case. This determination shall be revised by 10%, cumulatively, every three years. It may be clearly stated that this amount of Rs.30,000/- i.e., loss of domestic care is to be taken as a ‘stand-in’ (basic minimum monthly income) for monthly income in those cases where the homemaker does not have an input into the house,

¶119

13 - NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶120

HC-KAR

¶121

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶122

in strictly conventional, monetary terms. In those cases where the homemaker is part of the workforce, the component of loss of domestic care shall be in addition to the monthly income as may be proved before the Tribunal/Courts.

¶123

11. Considering the said decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court, the claimants lost domestic care of the deceased as the deceased was functioning as a home maker and her contribution towards smooth functioning of the household, the loss of matrimonial support for claimant No.1 - daughter and loss of spousal support to claimant No.2 - husband and care of claimant No.1 who is child of the deceased. Therefore, the said loss of domestic care has to be taken at Rs.30,000/- as per the said decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court.

¶124

12. In the claim petition and also the evidence, it is contended that the claimant was doing agriculture work and milk vending and earning Rs.15,000/- p.m. The same has been denied in cross-examination of P.W.1. The

¶125

NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶126

14 -

¶127

HC-KAR

¶128

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶129

claimants have not established the said aspect. There is only a mere statement without any backing. As such, it is to be taken that as where the home maker has no income in monetary terms, as considered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the said decision of Shishupal.

¶130

13. The Tribunal has not taken into consideration the

¶131

future prospects. The age of deceased is now taken as 50 years and future prospects is to be taken at 10% and multiplier applicable is ‘13’ as against ‘14’ taken by the Tribunal. Since the deceased is having two family members, deduction towards personal expenses is to be taken at 1/3^rd . In view of the above, the loss of dependency is calculated as under:

¶132

Loss of domestic care/monthly income Rs.30,000/Annual income is Rs.3,60,000+36,000(10%)= Rs.3,96,000/. Rs.3,96,000 – 1/3 = Rs.2,64,000 x 13 = Rs.34,32,000/-

¶133

14. The claimants are daughter and husband of the deceased and they are entitled to loss of consortium in a sum of Rs.80,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 2). In view of award of

¶134

HC-KAR

¶135

NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶136

15 -

¶137

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶138

loss of consortium, the claimants are not entitled to

¶139

separately for loss of love and affection in a sum of Rs.20,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal. The claimants are entitled to funeral expenses and transportation of dead body of Rs.15,000/- and loss of estate in a sum of Rs.15,000/- as against Rs.25,000/- each, awarded under the said heads by the Tribunal. In view of the above, the claimants are entitled to total compensation under various heads as under:

¶140

1.	Loss of dependency	34,32,000/-
2.	Funeral expenses and transportation of dead body	15,000/-
3.	Loss of consortium	80,000/-
4	Loss of Estate	15,000/-
	Total	Rs.35,42,000/-

¶141

15. The total compensation awarded is

¶142

Rs.35,42,000/-. In view of the contributory negligence of

¶143

the claimant assessed at 50%, the Corporation is liable to pay 50% of the compensation i.e. Rs.17,71,000/-. The Corporation has already paid interim compensation of

¶144

16 - NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶145

HC-KAR

¶146

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶147

Rs.50,000/- and it has to be deducted in Rs.17,71,000/-

¶148

and balance comes to Rs.17,21,000/-. The claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.17,21,000/- as against Rs.14,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. Consequently, the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.2,61,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. The claimants are not entitled to interest for the delay period of 210 days in filing the appeal.

¶149

In the result, the following:

¶150

ORDER

¶151

(i) Both the appeals are allowed in part.

¶152

(ii) The claimants are entitled to enhanced

¶153

compensation of Rs.2,61,000/- with interest

¶154

@ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.

¶155

17 - NC: 2026:KHC:36727 MFA No. 2103 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 4382 of 2023

¶156

HC-KAR

¶157

CNR: KAHC010161912023

¶158

(iii) The claimants are not entitled to interest for the delay period of 210 days in filing the appeal.

¶159

(iv) The Corporation shall deposit the enhanced compensation with interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from this day, failing which it is liable to pay interest @ 9% p.a. from this day till deposit.

¶160

(v) The claimants are entitled to release of the entire enhanced compensation with interest.

¶161

(vi) The amount in deposit is ordered to be transmitted to the Tribunal.

¶162

Sd/-

¶163

(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶164

DSP/DKB

¶165

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37 Ct.sm

The Divisional Controller Ksrtc v. Kumari R J Kavya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Divisional Controller Ksrtc v. Kumari R J Kavya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr Pranam @ Pranamgowda Vs the Manager

The Branch Manager Vs Sri Nanjaiah

Nanjaiah Vs Akash K

Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Sri. Nagarajegowda

Sri Basavanna M C Vs Sri Puttiraiah

Pramodaradhya. H. K. Vs Mohankumar. S.