9
1.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT
DATED THIS THE 111*! DAY OF JUNE :«:g'i#oAa"%:
PRESENT;
THE I~ION'BLE MRSJUSTICE ra4Ar;JufLA'AAcHELLfiR--A._"*
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.Jus'r1<:E'2<;,N.KESii.«vAIs§Ar§A.YAN;« A
M.F.A.NO.1810 (we: : 1: A V}
BETWEEN:
MOHAMMED ANASIRLIDi'_)i--N S; 1&)BAi§MiYA INAMDAR,
AGE 47 YEARS V
000:
RAB1_YA NASIRUDDIN
(Rf? DEL!-HEAD) - _ -
. AR~.=§H1§'A E?"$fi(V.V?r"i;I'A!\r'1Av{"),*.'V_:('A)*--~.V:b':/:ItV)I~.iD. NASIRUDDIN,
AGE: :7 YEARSJAA' ,\
Mom). NAYEEB}! sfowmono. NASIRUDIJIN,
(,A':;'\:'xE!___15_YEARS,..,QCC! NIL
.' "NAZ1,YAjVBfiiGUM D/O MOHD. NASIRUDDIN,
-."AGE: 72;; YEARS, occ: NIL
A '--APPELLA~N'TS 3 TO 5 ARE MINORS
HULEPPA HEROOR, ADV.)
1
UNDER VGUARDIANSHIP OF THEIR
NATLERAL FATHER APPELLANT No. 1
A 'A ALL ARE RESIDENT OF ROZA, GULBARGA.
APPELLANTS
:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
M.S.R.T.C.,
NANDED DISTRICT,
NANDED (MAHARASTRA STATE)
RESPONDENT
(By M] S ANGADI ASSOCIATES, SRI.S.V.ANGADI, ADV.)
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 13.6.2006 PASSED
IN MVC NOA38/O5 ON THE FILE OF THE PRérd’ers’,’; by the
consent of both the taken up for
final dispose}. pr;-::;:;;¢rits.;%A t
2. tlijettaefzitient on 28.6.2004 at
about Ve;;:A:”tt1e4x:2ti£:y__to Awasa from Tuljapur is not
in dispute 4′ about 20 years by name
Mohq.’ egg ‘or e.p;;e]1ants 1 and 2 and brother of
. heteizz who was driving a Tara Sumo
531%: 24 C 3568 when the offending bus
Nona-20% 5346314 dashed against the Tata Sumo causing
” i31eVTspetdteat11 of the Mohd. Rahim is also not in dispute.
‘ H3. The appellants approached the Tribunal claiming
” eempensation towards loss of dependency etc. about
Rs.11,00,(}00/- and the Tribunal after apprising the
material held that the driver of the bus was responsible for
the accident and awarded corapensaficn cf Rs.2,31,600/-
taking the income of the deceased as
The appenants being not satisfied with me Q
compensation have sought for enharicemerat in
and the respondents have. not ‘
findings of the Tribllnal. {mes sage a
detailed enquiry into fthe of the
driver of the offending ms.
4. it is
” Rs.4,000/- per
montkt as–_ an and on the fateful day, on
the rash and negligent driving of
tI1¢._§bi1s. drive1=,._V_VV1:ie nret with untimely death leaving his
kith and kin to despair. All the sisters
the deceased seems to be the only male
of appellants I and 2. The very fact that the
R ctzrtaervvdt; the Tata Sumo had entrusted this vehicle to this
‘ t)cy’though he was of 20 years would only indicate that he
“Was an experienced and eficient driver as on the date of
death Possibility of him earning good money in fixture
and thereby assisting his parents and unmarried sisters
cannot be ruled out Having regard to ali these facts and
the age of deceased, we can take the income of the
deceased at Rs.3,500/– per month including
batta as on the date of his death. If We deduct _
x 12 x 14 divided by 2) it comes m%ns.e2,94?0oo}i;;; ” x
loss of estate Rs.S,000/-;
affection of the only son V3 V5 ‘
Rs.25,000/– is awarded. other
incidental charges Rs.’1}$,oda In all, the
appellants entitiee if: Veieefipensafion of
Rs.3,34,00p.,’ 1e,6C{o’/’;’; Having regard to
the we do not want to
imaerfere interest of 8% per annum on the
compeneafi”onVa{va.fdVed the date of the petition till the
_ date: -:5f.depousitV,VV: V’ far as the apportionment of the
order of the Tribunal is confirmed to 12 weeks
“to deposit.
ee/mm
Iuége
3%/MW
Judge
RS/”‘