IN1}flEHKHiCOURT(X?KARNATAKA.
CIRCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF sE1>TEMBER;'%2.§'1G,k1
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE;
M.F.A. N0.121 13 OF 2.00-5 (MV): - *
M.F.A. CROB. N0."1.0'09 OF'-2008;
IN MFA N0.121_2G»/G6" AND»
M.F.A. N0."1~2120 0FA---2966' (MV)
M.F.A. NO.12118/06 _
BETWEEN
NORTHWE'S'{!3V5.KAI§NATA1K1A R6A1j
TRANSPORT CQR£?Q~RA<£f1@.N". ~
CENTRAL OFFICE', jjj§:;0K_U'L ROAD.
HUBLI, BY*1fI'1sVVMANAG1N_;:r DIRECTOR. ...APPELLAN'l'
_ [BY CHAITANYA KUMAR, ADV.)
Arm}
1;.
W/Q SR1 MJALLAPPA @
BABASAB I4-'ULLARI.
*A_GED ABOUT 44 YEARS.
' PA;;\I1)1*r,
'~ _ sgo BABASAB @ MAIAAPPA FUL-LARI,
" ..A.C}ED AI3C)U'I' 26 YEARS.
I'-J
OCC. COOLIE.
3. ZULEKHAN.
"W/O SR1 BABASAB FULLARI.
AGED ABOUT 4} YEARS.
4. KHAWAJASAB BABASAB @
MALLAPPA FULLARL I
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS.
5. NANIMA,
D/O BABASAB @
MALLAPPA FULLARI,
AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS-,._ _
M/G BY RESPONDENTANO3' ;
ALLARE R/O S4ALGARj.A 3 _ ~
AKKALKO’I’TQ_, =
SOLAPUR ‘ ” »
6. SMT; SAi\}’1TO_SH1:'{SHI’V’§}’ CPLAVAN
@ LAMANAI-, ACiE”»MA.jOR’,’~~–., A A
OCC. DRIVER AND:fOWNE»R..-OF
THE MoT©ER’ACYCE,E;. =
R/O MADURA,_?NAc;AR., “PANDA INDI. …RESPONDENTS
V” “‘fBY’M:/S”CI%IE2TANA”‘ASsoc1ATEs FOR R1, R2:
»S_RI _SA..Ci«}I’NV 5: MAGADUM, ADV., FOR R6;
*–Esm. SE £ANI<Ai-I: RANGAREJI, Am/., FOR R3:
s SAJJAN SI~:'£E'I'I'Y, ADV, FOR R6)
MFA' CR,0B;':'..-N0. 1 009 /O8
~ .- E 'BETWEEN
T"'A.§jAN'1}'0sH, s/0 SI-HVU CHAVAN,
AGEI) ABOUT 27 YEARS.
OCC. DRIVER.
S / O MADU RANAGAR TANDA.
TQ. INDI, DISTBIJAPUR.
{BY SR1 S S SAJJANSHE’I”1″‘Y, ADV. ,)
AND
NORTH WEST KARNATAKA RQADKA
TRANSPORT CORPORATION .. _ 4″‘ V
CENTRAL OFFICE, GOKUL ROAD,
HUBLI, BY ITS MANAGING DIREQCIIIQR, ”
. I . .RESPONI)EN’i.’
[THE MID KSRTC, BANg3AI.0_RE;1, R.
…CROSS A’ V.
(BY SR1 CHAITANYA A ;V
M.F.A. No;~1’2″j;26i§6
BETWEER ” — I} I, I :3′; I
N0R’mI’*N”E–sT KARN.ArARA..–~RoAI)
TRANSPORTIICVORPO.RAT1-ON,
CENTRAL OFFICE; GOKUL ROAD.
._ 1~«1UB.1,I,v BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
{BY SRI,A_VCH«AOITANYA KUMAR, ADV.)
A1\.ID5 A
SRI4uSAI$\IAf1″C.)§’aH.
~ . TS/’Q SR1 SHIVU CHAVAN,
“AVGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
OC~Ci DRIVER.
R3/O MADURANAGAR TANDA.
~»-{N131 TALUK,
. . .API3’ELLAN’I’
BIJAPUR IDISTRICI’. . . JQESPOND ENT
[BY SR1 S S SAJJANSHETTY, A.DV.,)
>3′-=£=*=f¢
M.F.A. NO12118/O6 IS FILED UNf3E’R–.:SE”C7FI-QIxI_
173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST ‘I’*HE”‘JIIDOMEN’:IfAND
AWARD DATED 15.7.2006 PASSED IN MV*C_ NO”.
ON THE FILE OF FRL. IDISTRICT.JUI)C}E.,i1;MEMB’ERI
MACT–1, EIJAFUR, AWARDINGA COMRENSATIONOF –. ‘
RS. 45,16,000/– WITH FUTURE_”‘IITNTERESTA.@ E% RA.
FROM THE DATE OF FIL_ING._ OF PETITION TILL
REALIZATION. _ I
MFA CROB. NO.I0D9}’0é:’AIN~«..M}:iA_[:12I20/05 IS
FILED UNDER_ORDER”‘Zi’1;.”:RUI§E 2.;2._C.F.C. AGAINST
THE JUDGMAENTI I AND A’w’ARD(* ~ DATED 15.7.2008
FASSED IN MFC “N’C>.,4452}-/200;) ‘(IN THE FILE OF THE
MOTOR 1111 AC.CID.}§;_N1’S”‘ _”CLA_IMS TRIBUNAL NO.I
BIJAPUR, ATABIJAPUR,”»33AR’I’LY”ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PE3’I’I’1’ION~. A FO’F2″~-._COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF} COM’PENSA’l’ION.
VM.F.AI=N_O.122120/O6 IS FILED UNDER SECTION
173(1) OF MV’A.AC’l’ AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
f “vAWARI}..j-Ij)A§’.ED 157.2006 PASSED IN MVC NO442/O0
ON-.Tfl’_E’«FI.I_;E. OF FRL. DISTRICT JUDGE, MEMBER.
” 1_’;»,EIJA_F[UR, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF
RS.’EE,00O.j—. ‘gWITH FUTURE INTEREST @ 6% RA.
FROM ‘DATE OF FILING OF FETITION TILL
– V V REALIEATION.
” ‘S~..THESE M.F.AS. A/W CROSS OBJECTIONS
” _ COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY THE COURT
‘ D’ELIV’ERED THE FOLLOWING;
COMMON JUDGMENT
The two appeals are filed by the
questfioning the que1.nt um of compensation :1\ély21lft}:%j’c’l–.,:to._. .
the claimam: and Cross objec.tio11 for e1fl1l1éi’11(5crri’ooi,oi
comper1sat.ion.
2. The facts of the Case co-rnl1′.<aoI1 toi. .lj_.):ot:'l1 V
appeals and cross objecti011slVlV*c'1t_é' thatll'o11l'l6;V4.2l:Q00 the
claimant in MVC No.駫;§2;./ :;jdllt1g; the ltnotorcyole
and near Nagathan pm. KSRTC
bus be.€C1ring%1 came from opposite side
and clasllzgztfitytlo Following the said
aC:Cidjc:'1'1t_t.ho V-pyillioa" 'rider of the n1otor<:ycle namely
a11dthe rider of the motorcycle namely
lE32_11'ith.osl*1z""got.V.l'11ji.:red. Claim petitions were filed by the
le§;e1'l'– rep'i'és;ei1t.21t.ives of a.fo1"esaici. l\/Iallappa and also by
.:t:l1r~:JltnjLiV1'od Santosh. MACT allowed the claim petitions
zi;§Cl'2iWa1r(le(l 2; sum of 34,16,000/– in MVC .No.629/00
"Vt-*l91ictl1 we-1&3 filed. by the L.R.s of clectrased Malla1.3pa1. it
ls.
6
aiso awarded co1npe:t1sai:ior1 of 368.000/W in MVC
No.442/2000 which was filed by the ingiireci
Liability was put on the Corporatiozn. 1
3. The iiability was qiiestioned by the C’orporatio11v.”‘_”i H
b€f()~f€ this Court in MFA No.121’1’9’/Us Q_ a.nd.;«tfiis_CVoa’rtKT.,
dismissed the Corporations: ap1:>:eaI”.3V_3zy
dated 28.5.2009. Therefore iiaiofigity is riot in
4. As far as the qu_a_Iit:;,1In._»_ of ‘e.r)r;_1pe1%1sation
a_wardediri is cuoricverned, grievance of the
appeilarit. has taken the income at
Q’.-4,000,/W it is on the higher side, more
.0 0. ”’over*~-the.’accident. iovicetirred in the year 2000. Therefore
éhelredueed to $3,000/W and in the other
ease-..__of j.:1j1:i;%yA0MACT has awarded 368.000/» and it is
also on ‘£..h”e higher side.
5. Oil: the other haiid, leairimd (?()L¥I’1S(:’.1 f01’___t,he
claimants argued that iiht’. Compensation a\ve1rded’iif§f”i.h’i,é
two (raises are just and reasorlable 1’e£;iiirii1:g”i.”‘ ‘
redu(tti0.11 and far as liability if-1*’CO’i1C€I’i_)(3d,”i1’i”‘!ibW:V.0f”»..
this Court’s decision in the A:’é.vf()y’3″‘(.3fI1€11fiQiTJ.’Cd2
N0. 121 19/ 2006 it is not .,i:o . to
contend that it is not h i i i
6. In lights of submissions
putforward “1’iabi’1’ity. bf, ifiiiév-:»C0rp0rati0n has been
sei’,t1edi’bbj?viv_MFAV”Nb.12119/06, only the
quantiirii. ‘of awarded by the tribunal
requires to ii
_~5–7.v_ii’11.Vthe” ‘«:t21.s§:__.0i’ death of Mallappa the ciaim
by his wife and children and MAC’?
i,<i0i.{"ihev 'iI."i'Cx()41.'i}vV€ at: $4,000/« per inonizh. Though the
i»Vappeiiarit4301111391 argL1cd that the said iiicome is on the
fE'1igi1E:~r side, yei ii is noticed from the evi(1e11(:e placed by
the claimants that the deceased was 21 priest. and he__wa_s
also 21 mantravacii and was also a eoutmtziy
pin:-1et'itio1'1e;" and it was when the deceased 131:1 g.o'ne: "
the village for the purpose ofi"w'ii.(:hc§_t'aft" it
accident. occurred on the way. 'Fa?;ing_f1ot.e'of.t*he
the deceased which was 45_"~yea1*5§ q8.I"i€'1A "nLiniVber'V of V
Qccupatjons hf; "I33 '1"lv'IS W1fC.
MAC'? therefore took the ti'~Va_t.'"'{.4,000/- per
month. Even,.CoiiirtgiAfr1i1eVA'd'i_e:posi:1g of the appeal
preferred by in MFA No. 121 19 /O6
observeti' 1 the said appeai that the
income taken at ?.,jV4»,0O'a0"/'«+w~"per rrionth is also on the
higher side." A .
1Ai’ght=___Qfv the aforesaid factors quantum of
(éoffipeI’:vs’2itlt’;hi”afwarded in MVC No.82?)/00 which has
gitzeii”mrziisevftoi'”MFA 12118/O6. does not require any
_ 4 t V t_redt1<.:t.i(_ir';.3
9
9. Cciming to MFA No.12120/06. wherein_..__the
(tompensation awarcied in MVC No.442/00 is <.%ai"}eCi~«.Vii'i.'
question- That was the ease of injury and the" (t1aih1s'n,t"' : V'
Santosh has suffered two fra(:f:,i1r(»::s. A and 0 si'mp,1ez
injuries. MACT i,he3*efo1'e awzirded -'~
the grievous injuries and * Aheach
injuries. Thus at
368,000/». Though Vifadpdpears that the
compensation. each. of the
grievous yet taking note of
the fa__¢i{" did not award the
compensation' heads like pain and
suffeifing, Iossd ofafnenities of life, loss of earning
"'eapaeity.;"'» eiie,, theviiieompenseition over ail awarded at
£tjVS0LC:21nI1Ot be said to be on the higher side.
1~(V)v'.*E'c)i' the above reasons, the appeals filed by the
are dismissed. So also the cross
oliijections No. I 009/2008.
E”
2
EU
11. The Corp0ra1″ion is directed to dep0s1’t:___ the
21m0u1’1t before i,ribu1’1a1 within four weeks and 3_’fx1.(_§’a1’i*i’€,
in cEe130si€: before this Court: be transferrssd to ”
3UDGE’T»
YKL/-