IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS TI-IE 27'rH DAY or AUGUST. 2010
BEFORE
THE HON' BLE MR. JUSTICE B.sREEN1"vAsE~"
Miscellaneous First Appeal No. 2006 OF ~
C
Miscellaneous First Appeal
In MFA. 2006[O8
Between
1. Karnataka State Road *
Transport.CorporatiQn Lt:i;'»,'_ "
Shanthjenageiz', V_
Bangalcre A _ . V
Reptd. Bygi_t's Mazie;gi.;ig. Dirtzzctor
V % Appellant
(Bgsrj. NgS1§j?:gti1§ LeAdv.)
:__Su}.atha..4 ____ ..
" --W_/_0. _'t'1,i Parashurama,
'Age? yvsars,
Occi 'H_ousewife.
2. Sevimya,
A. D/"0 Sujatha,
'Age: 23 years,
"Occ: Ni}
Both are R/0 Hanakere Village,
Taluk and District Mandya.
%"
3. H. D. Parashurama,
S / 0 Papayya,
Aged 49 years,
Gee: Business,
R/ at. Hanakere Village, Dudcia I-Iobli,
Taiuk and District Mandya.
(By Sri. G M Ananda andVB. 1:4."
Advs. for C/R1,, ' " " i
_5 ".'."."E"i,€'_:vsfv)"t"iIv1"ti_.,e1*v.-ts' " . V
Notice not ordei*eti~..is respect --5R.3) r L'
This MFA is filed U/s,i1,73{1}-of MVAPI against the
judgment and aWaI'd4"date.d I_7§'OS,20.07 passed in MVC
No.31'?/2006 on the 7fi?'e:? oi] -,V%Member, MACT,
Srirangapatna, AWa;:ding__ a""3 Vcojvmpensation of
Rs.5,00,000_/.--_wi_th jEnte1'*e.st.,@'~.69/9, from the date of
petition ti1i%3ep}:i~si.t..,
In
Between . it
1. siitttjstuiathiatt .
_ W/ 0}' 1-1'; D,',~Pai*_asii:1,1rama,
V, Aged abmzt 38 years.
V' -- H, Parashurama,
Ageciabbut 22 years,
"are R/(). I-Ianakere Viiiage,
Mandya Taluk.
Present R/0.
Arakere Village,
Srirangapata.
.. . Appellants
(By Sri. G. M. Amanda and B. L. Asha, Advs.)
%/
1. Divisional Controller
K.S.R.'i'.C.,
K. H. fiouble Road,
Shanthinagar,
Bangalore.
2. H D Parashurama
S/O. Papaiah,
R/at. Hanakere Village.
Dudda I-Iobli, "
Manclya Taluk.
V _ ..l'"Respondents
(By Sri. N B 'nl\".{_~._.2¥.served)
This P'flF.m:E'~:"i.S fil--ed={'U7S'"lE7l3('l).._.of MV Act, against
the judgemeiat1"an;_:1'awardd'at--e'd V_17.09.2O0'7 passed in
MVC No.3.1V7l,/ 2:006 'on"t'ne "file of 'Member, Addl. MACT.
Sriran"gapat'na, "*fgzat*tly '=allo'Win--g" the claim petition for
compensa.tiVor1.' _ it ' . _ .1'-.eek1'ng enhancement of
compensation? l
_ _ Thes~ep"appVealsll Coming on for Hearing, this day,
Court, deliivperedv the following:
J U D G M E N T
Z “lAs.’these two appeals are arising out of a common
2 judgment and award of the Tribunal, they are heard
disposed of by this common judgment, with the
consent of learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
%/
3. For the sake of convenience parties are referred to
as they are referred to in the claim petition before the
Tribunal.
4. Brief facts of the case are: 9
That on 15-2-06, when the
motor bike bearing registratiori
with his friend Nagendra_…?as__ pi1.1io171:V_’Arpi_der from
Kailahalli side .oi91t_i\’/V:I.'(3_iroad, Mandya.
near bus bearing
registration in a rash and
negligent their vehicle. As a
resuIt’,_phe_ and later succumbed to
the injuries. inother and sister filed a claim petition
MACT;—Si*irangapatna, seeking compensation
/–. The Tribunal by impugned judgment
has awarded compensation of Rs.5,00,000/–
with”,i;fi1terest at)_ 6% p.a. Aggrieved by the quantum of
‘coniipensation awarded by the Tribunal the claimant is
___?in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
Sir
5. As there is no dispute regarding the death of the
deceased Vishwas in a motor road accident,..___and
iiabiiity of the insurer of the bus, only point”
for my consideration in the appeal is: A it it it V .
Whether the .
compensation awarded by: th.1eTI”ri’nuna1′ is
just and proper or does ‘xjt call for ‘- ‘
enhancement? ‘ ” V =
6. After hearing the”p«iearned forithe parties
and perusing the award_ I am of the
View that the Tribunal is
not just and iourer side and therefore
it is deserxpred
7. The rdeceased;Vish}vas was aged about 22 years at
the«§ti’rn’e of in the accident, as evident from
» the_Vpo.st«.n*iortem report ~– Ex.P.4 and SSLC marks card —
‘ who are his mother and sister in
support.’ their contention that the deceased was
studying in fine} J.O.C. at C.P.C. Polytechnic College,
Charmapatna and aiso working as a part time
Computer operator in Guru Wine stores, Mandya and
%’
earning Rs.5,000/– per month, have examined the first
claimant as P.W.i. They also produced ‘Prashasti’
certificate -~« Ex.P.7 issued by Navodaya
school, Srirangapatna, deceased secured award = in
science exhibition conducted” Mat” « Governrrie_nt”‘5Pre.–
University College, Srirangapatna;
Ex.P.8 which reveals, he””1<1as been._V.av.n;..rd'ed'VV"secondV
piace in volleyball spomsis"'¢pfm1ju§tea airing 2004-05
issued by Goyernment'C"PolytechnicJfchtannapatna and
SSLC he has secured
66.40% i11V.S$f{;C.
V and I I disclose that he is
studying iny”~«’.Engineering. Ex.– P.12 salary
certificate Guru Enterprises, Mandya,
disgcioses was yvorking as a part time computer
drawing salary of Rs.5,000/– per month.
of Sri. Guru Enterprises was examined
as Considering he is a bright student and also
having. talent in sports and studying in final year
‘”‘~:f)ip1oma and working as part time Computer Operator
H in Guru Enterprises, his income could be easily
Q95
assessed at Rs.4,500/~ per month. Claimants are his
mother and married sister.
8. Subsequent to the tiling of the claim
father of the deceased who was arrayed as
to the claim petition. passed away; ‘-Tthe’._on_VV1# if
is his mother. 50% of his incoine’-has
towards his personal expenses. Mother ‘wast aged’
between 37 to 40 years. Multiplierljapplicabie ‘to her age
group is ’15’ as per Court in the
case of §Tl’ierefor_e.,_l_ofss of dependency
works outtolRsi%3;.e05;jQ0O/’–“”*{Rs§.4,500/– 2: 50/100 x 12
x 15]:V_and ‘ as against Rs.4,8-0.060/–
awarded the
D:eceased”‘a;..t.e1* sustaining injury was shifted to
Bangalore. where he succumbed to
‘the after two days. Therefore, a sum of
Rs.10,lO0O/~ is awarded towards medical and incidental
” « . V’ expenses.
Ei
10. Rs. 10,000/– awarded by the Tribuna} towards loss
to estate and Rs.10,000/– awarded towards
transportation of dead body and funeral
just and proper and they do not
enhancement.
11. In addition to that, a
awarded towards love and affec,tion o-f_the. it
12. Thus the c1airnants,Aaree.entitled fame following
compensation:
1. Loss’ ;depe_nden.ey’«..x”‘b~1 it ” Rs. 4.05000/–
2. Mea,a¢g1idA3ai1d ;1gcide.;:;;i
‘ ” _eXpenses=__°-._t” ‘ Rs. 10,000/–
31’ Loss Rs. 10,000/–
.’__I’ranspo-rtation of dead body
‘ arrd Funeral expenses Rs. 10,000/–
affection Rs. 10,000/-
Total Rs.4.45,000/~
r Accordingly both the appeals are allowed in part
and the judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified
to the extent stated herein above.
3/
14. The claimants are entitled to a total compensation
of Rs.4,45,000/– as against Rs.5,00,000/– awarded by
the Tribunal, and compensation awarded the
Tribunal is reduced by a sum of Rs.55,000/
15. Out of the compensation arriount’;
a sum of Rs.3,00,000/–
amount is ordered to be inve’sted iii in “name of ‘ i
the first claimant, who is the’ of the-‘deceased, in
any nationalised/schedule-., -La period of 9
years, renewab_}e. once years,’ arid she is permitted
to 3f:.the”–l:> ‘interest. periodically for her
maintenance: of the remaining amount
Rs.’4$rh;000/– is ordered to be released
}*fa§.riour of the-e1.aimants No.1 and 2 respectively.
as to costs.
Sci?/4
Fudge
dsprsngcn/_