High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Kasturewwa vs The Managing Director Ksrtc on 24 August, 2010

Karnataka High Court
Smt Kasturewwa vs The Managing Director Ksrtc on 24 August, 2010
Author: K.Bhakthavatsala And B.V.Nagarathna
4,, MFA No.1 14522005

IN "I"I--I__I5;§j. 111(§_.;n c<')1'___.JR'1"' ('W K.ARNA'I('A 

CIR.(;'.UI"'I"'" 1~3I<1I\!("_'T'.H AT D'I~~-I'A__R\N'A1.) 2' 

£_)A'I"IfZI§) Tms "I"!-----H151 24"" DAY ()I''*" AL.;([;LTJ$_f:";~._f;g(}  % T' '

Ij'I{_}E:1S1'£N'T[T'

THE HONBLE DR.JUSTiCE IiBHAK7IfI?iAVA3%S.A'Ig-A" K   %

AND   ..  _
"mg HON '.Bi..J1?751 MRS. .1 'L1_s'}:i1cg"Ii;V.MA(3A;RA'*1"f}~kNA

MFA No.1 1454'2'%c)'F'2::'}'0%5 (.¢f\J~iVV) 'J 

BETWEEN:

1. Smt. Kasturevifv¢_a.,..VV_    _ _

W / 0 ShivariagoudafSavak1z:ai;avar,
Aged abou:_39M years"; ,  _ 

Occ: H0useh0,1d'wo1i_k,'~.v ' 'V

R,' 0 Ufargol, Tq; vS'aVu1'1cia't:ti,

    ..... 

2.  «S'ri; Ningah'ag'Qud.a,
S)' .o"Sh«£Vafi*a;go1;1'd'é1 Savakkanavar,
 Aged aboL_1t 2'i1_ years,
V _ Occ: 'Stucien't;"R/0 ~wdo--

' "I i' 4." ' " Kumari Rékh a,

  "D",'Q_Shj«ivanag0uda Savakkanavar,
-Aged'IvIin0r, Occ: Student,

  WCIO'.



éi MFA No.1 l452.2005

4. Kumari Parvati,
D/o Shivanagouda Savakkanavar,
Aged Minor, Occ: Student,
R/ o ~do--.

(By Sri. Jagadish Patil and
Sri. K. Anand, Advs.)

AND:

1. The Managing Director,
KSRTC, K.H. Double Road,
Shantinagar, Bangalore.'

2. The General Manager, ll _  
KSRTC, Kl-I Double Road, _  '

Shantinagar, Ba_nga1or-Q3, V    
Through Divi_s3ion;a'1"' COn*trofl_1er,   " 
KSRTC, Beligaum "'D}"'J'__iSiO.1':g1--,vg     '
Belgaum '  D   «. V V

 AV      Respondents
(By Sn. Shival<u;na1f' S, --«Badawad._agi,." Adv. for R-1 8:, 2)

This§VIis_c.:ellar1'e,ous First Appeal is filed under Section
l.7'3'(1}_ of-i__M\[._.VA::t again.--st««'the Judgment and award dated
O2'.O5.p2OQ5 passedjn MVC Nod.1743/2001 on the file of the
Civi.1'<;}u'dge~ (S=.i_Dn';v).Vg.&--Member, Addl. MACT, Saundatti, partly

 allowing"t_11.e "*cl'a1'_rr1._'petition for compensation and seeking
 "enhanceinent of compensation.

 "This Appeal coming on for final hearing today, Dr. K.
4: l3hal<th'a'Vo'a_tsal'a, J, delivered the following:

. . . * D'



15 MFA No.1 1452,2005

JUDGMENT

The appellants viz., wife and children of the deceased

Shivanagouda Savakkanavar are before this Court prayin_g..’for

enhancement of compensation in MVC No.1743 .

file of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.)/Addl. MACT,_S.a14ndatti;” dig c

2. Learned counsel for the appe11a’nts1.:_’stibrrrit”

deceased was working as a priestV:v”‘jn_ at
Saundatti. Apart from that, he buoi.ness and
agriculture and earning Rs.l4l;0Q’,’OO.QVl:’O}J from all

sources. But the Triounal the deceased

at Rs.3,000.C5v€) the multiplier 13, has
awarded compensation ._of_ Rs_l..3,36,000.00 towards loss of
dependengfiz, vfu.rth”er_s1;bmits that compensation awarded

by the’ Tri”ouAr1al”towiards other heads is also on the lower side

e-and prayslfor enhfgjtncement of compensation.

_l_3«,__4lvlrearnedllcounsel for the respondents submit that the

has awarded adequate compensation and there is no

goodllgroiund made out for enhancement.

.3
I
E
i

&1KA’fl4rflJ¢4 –

|:£f’ MFA No.1 14522005

4. We have perused the records of the Tribunal. lt is___the

case of the claimants that deceased was a priest in Yel.l’arn_’rna_

temple, Saundatti, and also doing business and

earning Rs.l,O0,000.00 per annum.

produced to show that the “3 -.ea,rr1li:i1glV’l*:

Rs.l,O0,000.00 per annum. on
08.04.2001. In the absence of.l-‘colgenlt-»,,.andlll’satislactory
evidence, income of the deceased’cani’l:le
per month. Since lylelars, we apply

multiplier 15 fo1lo'{vlr1«gl””tl§e.: by the Horfble

Supreme Court in the Verma 85 others vs. Delhi
Transport Corporation V’ and blaridother (reported in (2009) 6
Sup’r5.,me Case”s”«1._2__l.}. There are four dependents.

Hence,’ we” d,edvuCt;'”l /41″ of income towards personal expenses

the deceased, ‘.V’l:1°;_lr’§’sl.l,OO0.OO is deducted towards personal

__,e:~rpei1ses of deceased, loss of dependency comes to

month. We award compensation in favour of

‘ t-he..,appei1ants as under:

5,
E
K
‘s. . ”

\_/’

MFA No.1 14522005

Loss of dependency
(3000): 12 X 151»

Iis.

5,4o,o’oo.aoo

Loss of consortium

Rs.

?

haw-.____. …_w4

Love and affection

Rs.

l10sieQC;0_§l00ll;

Loss of estate

Rs.:'””

]f2io;o.0o%.oo »

Transportation of dead body
Total

” Rs.’-,

, io,g_olo;o0iv
. E5~,9’0,0CJ’@..O<'};

*\lO\U’i-i’-‘«”~C.OI\3

Less compensation awarded by the l

l’-Rs.

T 1 ,ooo.’o0

.

tribunal _._A

8 Balance

Thus the claimants are en’titled for Vadd.it.io’nal compensation

of Rs.2,l9,000.00.

Appeal isapartly”~a1l’o}wed.’—.holding that the claimants are
en_titled toladditionaheompenaation of Rs.2,19,ooo.oo with

coatslaildllinterestat the rate of 6% per annum from the date

of petitiorytilll’tl*:e__date of realization.

Acco1″;lili1gljzl the impugned judgment and award are

finodifiedi”«._The additional compensation amount along with

V” l.’fco_st’S and interest is apportioned among the claimants in the

ab ,_ .

E2, i”9,ooo.00 A

5 MFA No} 1452,2005

ratio of I1:3:3:3. In the case of minor, the share am;;:;1nt

shali be kept in fixed deposit till attaining the age H

The share amount of the major appellants shall

their favour.

%*5UDGE