IN THE HIGH COURT £313′ KARNATAKA,
DATED THES THE 22% DAY OF OCTQE:i§iR?:’b?;{}§38:”v
B39035 _
THE 1-i{)N’BLE MR. JUSTI {1E3,: B,$R§*:E1\I§fvAs£3 GOWDA
MISC. FIRST ‘A;iLr1PE;:3L;L:eVij;9%2%§? /»2(}0′?(MVC1)
BETWEEN; » % j*
NA’:’:0N;4xL £-NSIIRANQE ‘C:fiT)._–L’1’D’=
REGIQNA1.%%{)F%:{1C,§3 $3.9′ 1’44_M
SLI§5HARfi:.Ké_,C(}:l€{PLEX 1
M (}v..R®AD,VB.¥§N{3-ALQRE’ 1
BY ITS 1VEAN’A.GER ”
” V y APPELLANT
(BY sR1.(3..MA}§EsH, ADV.)
vv:T’S,éi’i§CR.f–:’KI}MAR DUBEY
AGED 45 YEARS
s;,<f<:: RAMAKMWH BUBEY
.0 :2/AT NC) 150, 5:1: cams
'*–'GOPAj{,APURAM,
BANGALORE) 10
'2 AMITHA DUBEY
AGED 43 YEARS
W/O SARCIJ KUMAR DUBEY
R/AT NS 150, 6'1"" CRQSS
GOPALAFURAM,
BANGALQRE 10
W
1096 0213116 from oppcsite fiirccticn in a rash
Iifigligtiflt masmezr and vielrzfilfly « AV
Kinetic Henda, as a restllt ha
1:9 his iI1j1_1I'i6S on his V. his»
parents filed 3 MACH'
Bangalore seaeking j- Iakhs from
the, respo1};d<§:%;§;3 I MA}. Act (herein
aftei' r<:f:«?.$f1;<;:2i.iV am}. The Tribm"1a3 has
of" Ké§%,53,300/-. Aggicved by
the by the Tribunai, £116
in$1.1ranz§té has preferred this appeal
. _ A (j§1:;'§i113fiflgi11_g ti"1é"'""é:£%ard af fhe Tiibunal both an the
rltzgligem as well as quantum of
cQ_n}§:g31fi$€i'tion.
Tha ciajmants have axaxnined the lat
Vgresponcient as P.W.1 and gm: t3X3I’fli1’l€(1 €}?€~WitflCSS as
” 3E’.W.2 and the cmpioyer 0:” the deceased as P,W..3 and
Q
it
“got marked Ex.P~1 ts R9. The m$pondent…fi’.~g§’_
any are} 01* doctlmentary evidence.
3. The claimants ‘1 i~
Dubs, the amployer of
income of the deceased h.é{s- galaxy
Chartificata as 1361’ the iAI1″(x:oIne of the
deceaseé th.-:&t..V_he I~1’s.3,8(}0 /- by
\>g{)I’Ki1’ig “E3i€i:§:?:1*onics cuncemed.
The V F.LR. Ex.?– 1, Charge
shag? I’€:fi¢£3i’t E;~:.P–3, hald that t1″i€:I’€
is I1<3 i*¢}§ut;'ai= by the appellant with
rfzgard. ta t§m=:_V'VC0ntributoIy negligenccsz answfired issus
:af3'1rmative hokiing that the aacident was
._ rash and negligent ciriving of the has by
féiyixgggi izfion the Jutjiglent 1'eport.r::d in ALR. 3985 SC
A' 2801 AER SC-W 85 and appijgzing the rule Gf $tri<::-t
flfiability prapounded in RYLANDS VS. FLETCHER case. I
" ham camfuliy gone thmugh the finding of the Triiatirial
an Issue No.1 and I have not fozmd any good reascm 1:10
%
T0 appreciaxe the contention offithe
ceaunsfil appearing fur' the II1é1_'1rar;(:'-.t: j AV
h"151,1:*aI2ce Cumpany has not
befora the 'mbuna1 cm11en§fng the imgume: §t;;§¢d&5y me
appeliani: that too .*a"2h_¢n i*:."i,fir:;§i§j4 P.W.3 the
employer of the dect§aS'%;d'.L'," Ex.P»-7 is
not cnly éccordance with the
Evidencé .r:i:1*a$.= '*T'ribuna1 is justified in
ass€;¥.§.'é}iVii5gT' fI1<:.'ud£§(:t3ast:d at Rs.3,3QO/ — pan.
Thsg 11¢xi:' Qé£1tei:ii§.§n Of the lcmnecl counsel far the
apigfifiant is" a(imi1:t.6C11§,-' the deceased was; :3.
»A V:V'bach,¢;iar', of his salary is ta be deduciad tewards
H '- Afie:'s{§f1;§IiL:€§;3§t§.nses and the loss of dapendency has to be
xvgsrkéd from the balance 50% of saiary. He may be
" ~ fight in a petition fiieé 1."5.I.'id(i":I"' 8:20.166 cf the Act. But it
Me. petition filfid under Sec. 163A of the Act and the
' deductien permissible as par Schedule II ef S<:c.163A is
only 1/3*"? Accerdingly, thfi Tribuilai has deciucted
%/
1 / 3%' of his income tewards personal E0111
the balance 0f 2/3*" of the iIi{_;oIz1¢ <I7»f
1053 (}f d€§Z1€tI1C3(":I1(:§s' was. .*;»sV7'c:~:t_f§~:r.§:ciV"¢.:;1_;1'ii.
of 3,30(}/- C()II1€S to Rs. 1, 0i%fRs.2,200/–
p.111. which 0011163 year. Then, I have
to see Whet.h¢r applied by the
;agg pf}-m deceased is just
was a bachelor and
his flag: as basis for ascertajniiag thfi
_ Tiiig was aged about 18 years, if
iafis age is consideratian than the multiplier of
' 18; i5_V*'pp.i i%:a.b}fi, if the age. sf his mother i.e., 38 is taken
. " –:_zi§;1;1tip1i6r of 14 is appiicabie. But taking the
0f aithar 18 £31' 14 is not §ust and }Z3I'(}pf:I'. In
— ” Idrziler ta halanttsfitgfsituafien, I feel if 15 mtflfiplier is takan
. 3:
it Wctlid mast {ha ends cf justice, therefore 1933 of
deyrendancy Wurks ta Rs.3,96,f3{3{},i’~ (2/3 af 3330*
EQOQXIQXI5) and I award this amount as. against of
Rs;.4,4~8,800/ – awarded by the Tribamal.
%’
peftitiesn til} the: date of deposit. The amtzaunt dezpgéfiiiéecfiif ‘ ‘
311}; shall stands t!”aIT£$f€IT€’:€} to
towards payment. The: _ “”a111c)13§§1t. ” Of;
ccmpensation shall be paid date of receipt of copy Of :« V %%%% IV « .j Judge L1'