{"id":29197,"date":"2008-08-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008"},"modified":"2014-10-19T05:30:08","modified_gmt":"2014-10-19T00:00:08","slug":"shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: K.L.Manjunath & Gowda<\/div>\n
1!! me man counsr or unnnwgn Ar\"sAii%;;Amg\u00a3%. ' \" V\n\nmrrsn 11:15 me 13*\" um!  g.L1:;ti4.sji',.'i'eds;[i\"?\u00ab..\u00ab \n\nPRE3E\ufb01T 'VV_ \nme I-IOWBLE MR. Jv.51'1%\u00a3:E _V\u00a7(.s.V, \n    _  \n\"ms uorrms HR. Jusr\ufb01f\ufb01  eowm\n\nM:sce=,gaanerms\u00ab.Ta\u00a7=f;rst %'_&pi:ae a 'i N'o\u00e9.S'\u20ac\u00a723...(Z\u00a7FA;004 mv)\n\nMisceilai\ufb01\u00e9cii\ufb01-3..First .A'b-be-.aTNo.?'v$5'7 CF 2904 ( MV)\n\nIn \ufb02FA N6;:\"'58\u00a7v_.\u00a7_ gk\u00e9igf \n\nShashikai\u00e9 .wio sate kmtisiiknaj \nAged about 25 years; ' \" \"\nByrapagizraa. Vmag-e, \"\n\n V. \u00a3han'rnzpa\u00a7nav%_Taiuk,'  ---------- --\u00ab \"\n\n Bang\u00e9ior\u00e9 Ru_ra:_ District.\n\n_ _ V  .  Appeilant\nmy  C; 'P\ufb01tf\u00e9\u00e9wamy, Adv. )\n\n \u00ab 'Q N  I,  .\n\n-   \":1;  R\u00e9fnegowda,\n\n'  E3\/G.=Shfvaixngegcwda,\n\"Clo Puttaswarny (KEB)\nRarayanagowdara Beedhi,\n\n' V'  R.\u00a7(. Gate, Channapatna,\n\nBangalore Rural District.\n\n\n\n\" \"3angva_I'\u00a3:re; ..\n\n2. The Orientai Insurance Co. L.td.,\nBranch ef\ufb01ce,\nDAB--2, No.232\/19'   \nPavitra South Avenue, 1\n9\"' Main, 3\"\" Block,\nJayanagar, Bangfaoredl. ,\nRepresented by the Managef;-~... . V .   \"\n  \".4. Respondents<\/pre>\n
(By Sri. AM. Venkatesh; AQv.,_\u00ab”f\u00a7’f’VAt{2{  <\/p>\n
This Appeal is \ufb02ied unaersemh  1;k’234:1 ) of MV Act<\/p>\n
against the judgment a:nd”vas:\u00a7zard..\u00a7iated 3’3i”;3.2004 passed ~<\/p>\n
in MVC No.3762,’2Q(\u00a71 on th__e–.\ufb01Ie”4of’t\ufb01*e..IX1 Additiona! Judge
\nand Member,4_.!*1ACT-?,~.Ca_ur?; e\ufb01iifmafi. Causes, Bangalore
\n(SCCHJ), :’par.f\u00a3y “””ai!owE\ufb01r:g” the”, ‘claim petition for
\ncempensationuahdilsgeking V_\u00e9s1han_;gn31ent of compensation.<\/p>\n
The Orientai i’rssg1ran’ceACoVr\ufb02pany Ltd.,
\nBranch; 0\ufb01”i.t:e, ‘ ~  .\n<\/p>\n
   ‘V<\/p>\n
Adm\u00a7n.\u00a3strat\u00a7Vs__ Gf\ufb01ter,<\/p>\n
 V ” The \ufb01\ufb01ieniz\u00e9isi. Iii\ufb01urance Company Ltd.,
\n_   R\u00a7:gionai’* Office,
\n” ‘V V. ‘M’.G., .R_’oad;’<\/p>\n
  Ba nga%\u20ac;_re.\n<\/p>\n
 Appeiiant<\/p>\n
 %ij% (wsrs. A.M. Venkatesh, Adv. )<\/p>\n
 “[AN D:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
1. Shashikaia W\/o iate Krishna,
\nAged about 23 years,
\nRio Byrapatna Village,
\nChannapatna Tafuk, \u00ab
\nBangaiore Rural District.\n<\/p>\n
2. Sri. Ramegowda,<\/p>\n
S\/o Shivalingegowda,  –\n<\/p>\n
Major, C\/o Puttaswa.n”{y (i(EB;}V. ” ‘
\nNarayanagowdara Beed h’i,”-.5′
\nR.|(. Gate, Channapa.tn.a,’–. ‘ _A
\nBangalore Rs,njav!._District._”V.\u00ab: .  <\/p>\n
i  V .    Respondents<\/p>\n
(By Sri. Pufia.s$i\u00a7\u00e9;{ny;”.Ad\u00a7;_fof ‘Fi1) f. <\/p>\n
These A;::oe.a#s_are% ‘f”\u00a5i,_e\u00a3!. under Section 1?3(1) of MV
\nAct against the’ j Lzdgme1t” and award dated 31.3.2004
\npassed in._M’VC No.3\u00ab7\u00e92}’20i31 and 376212001 respectiveiy
\non the \ufb01leef the % AAdd\u00a7.t~iLona! Judge and Member, MAC’?
\n7,. Court of Smaii” Causes, Bangalore (SCCH-7), partly<\/p>\n
 al|o_w3i:,ng_ MSIC 3′}*’52,{2DO1 for compensation and seeking<\/p>\n
 ‘enVhanc\u00e9ment.A\u00a7 of compensation, and awarding<\/p>\n
 corr:pVen$ati’o\u00abn “cf Rs.2,51,000\/- with interest at 5% PA. In
\nowe 37521V2oo2.oon~<\/p>\n
 Th..\u00e9se”‘;appeais coming on for admission, this day,<\/p>\n
 V!Si’i;UGO!’ALA eowm, 3., delivered the foliowingz<\/p>\n
,2UQGM\u00a7\ufb02T<\/p>\n
with consent of the iearned counsel appearing on<\/p>\n
 \u00bb  both sides, the appeais are heard for final disposai.<\/p>\n
\\\/<\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
2. Appeuant in MFA 5823\/2004 was the.–.4:\u00a7etit’\u00e9rotteert’  ‘<\/p>\n
MVC 3762\/2001 on the file of MACT1; eangetege.%epge:.enttt& ”<\/p>\n
in MFA 7567\/2004 was the 2″” res;:51enc\u00e9feTn~t irr   ._<\/p>\n
petition. Both the appea’.ee<"\\a.re d'i'recteq '-.aQ:eihs'E 'the A A<\/p>\n
common judgment dated 3;1t.,3V;f;;w:{)O'4~.._ ano"'tr2e..veeparate
\naward passed in the' iii\u00e9titiofi, wherein,<\/p>\n
Rs.2,61,000\/- w\u00e9iceintereet'  Aai\u00a7vea'eie\u00a2;t favour of the<\/p>\n
peuuonea _~3<\/p>\n
3:;VV"i5orrA..trhe  corttiehience, parties win he
\nreferredxeto 4–v\\rit:'teVV"f:V!A.=A+'j1"'@:bre–!3e:':A3\\t~:~.~-to their rank in the ciaim<\/p>\n
petition,  <\/p>\n
   facts necessary for consideration and<\/p>\n
d'i'5|5'o.sei""e meals are:\n<\/p>\n
 “TheVi.ori’ 22.2.2001, deceased Krishna and others,<\/p>\n
.ttteree..4_treVveliing in a Maxi Cab bearing Rw.No.KA 05 A<\/p>\n
 B.M.Road, Channapatna. whiie proceeding on<\/p>\n
VT -jethe 7″‘ Cress, Kuvempu Hagar, B.M.Road, Chzmnapatne,<\/p>\n
” the driver of the Maxi Cab having driven the vehicie in a<\/p>\n
rash and negiigent manner, dashed agains\ufb01median stone.<\/p>\n
4<\/span><\/p>\n
Due to the impact, the vehicle toppled <\/p>\n
sustained injuries. Injured Krishna was taigeri-..to~  K ‘ <\/p>\n
hospitai, but did not respond and <\/p>\n
claim petition under Section_.1_66 oiitiie. i.Mt:\\i.i,\ufb02ict,” <\/p>\n
claiming compensation on act:otiiit of” the ‘riressiivstistaineo
\ndue to the death of her’:m.;sba’nti_  t’he””seit’i motor
\nvehicie accident. Responoeritiiihes  ex parte and
\nthe Insurance\u00a7.CotnVpan\u00a7r_A  However, it
\naomitteci that hes. respect of the said
\nvehicieirend eeiicy was vaiid from 26.2.2000
\nto 2s.2.2ooi.ri it ‘ctirite5tj:e tit’iiat, there is no liability to pay<\/p>\n
the \u00bb’oomeenseti’onV;’ es there was no actionable negligence.<\/p>\n
  aiso  that the deceased Krishna was the driver<\/p>\n
Atof t-h_e.1v\u00a2eiii\u00a7.2ie\u00bbx.et””the time of accident and was responsible<\/p>\n
V it _ for the e\ufb01zieent and hence, it is not liable to pay the award<\/p>\n
” ”   _”‘amoisnt;”*’ .\n<\/p>\n
it   On the basis of the pieadings of the parties, the<\/p>\n
it  -triiounai framed the foiiowing issues: R<\/p>\n
Z-\n<\/p>\n
(1) Whether the petitioner provestna\u00a3”f.d:her<\/p>\n
husband sustained injuries   <\/p>\n
occurred on 22.2.20O1″‘at—-aAbofdt  V’<\/p>\n
Road in front of 7’5TCi*’.\u00a7$_s”sv, <\/p>\n
Channapatna, Benqgeiorei’Rerai.VVAi)’is\u00a3i*i\u00a7:f”‘doe to” ‘<\/p>\n
rasn andv,neoIigentV:A’fd’_ri$iing d\ufb01i\ufb01iew\ufb01dnver of
\nmaxi cab ‘and died in the
\nhQsp:E_w?   , x
\n   proves that she is
\nV ” entii:ied’i\u00abior.4V\u00a7o-nn;:ensation? If so, what amount
\n Lent:\n<\/p>\n
”    whet’ drd-er?\n<\/p>\n
 ‘iA6-.ef8efoEeV*:’the tribunai, petitioner deposed as PW.1.<\/p>\n
Exs;.P1 id  have been marked in her evidence. The<\/p>\n
Jciaiments\/petitioners in MVC 3762 and 3763\/2001,<\/p>\n
  ‘d_e’;:oAsed as Pws.2 and 3. In their evidence Exs.P14 to P19<\/p>\n
wrseve been marked. On behaif of the 2″‘<\/p>\n
V respondentllnsurance Company, one Mohan Raj, working<\/p>\n
as Assistant Divisional Manager deposed Ks RW.:1. Exs.R1<\/p>\n
\/.\n<\/p>\n
no<\/p>\n
to R22 have been marked. Considering the <\/p>\n
raised by both sides and the.:ev:a4ence”%ah’lll’crecergjV, then.<\/p>\n
tribunal has aliowed the claim petition” <\/p>\n
favour of the petitioner ‘covriepeneeti.on .Vof-.:R’;:}2′;51:,000i~l’<\/p>\n
with interest at 6% M. frorr:——t4lfi’e.d’e.te or jaetitiorl.<\/p>\n
7. We have heard iearned counsel
\nfor the petitionerjapgjreilelnt e.ndViSrlV A.isitvVenkatesh, learned
\ncounsei   .re$rro’nde’etf\u00a7nsurance Company and
\nperused tne?lr_*ecoArd. –.  .’<\/p>\n
 Vlctiicttaewamy, learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
aj\ufb01goelilent\/petitien.er.~contended that, the tribunal has not<\/p>\n
‘ -;.”proApve4ri=5r:v’af5p..reciated the oral and documentary evidence<\/p>\n
” .ohl’recori*;l;_a:rid has committed a material error and iliegaiity<\/p>\n
 holdieo that there was 40% negligence on the part of<\/p>\n
2   ‘the deceased in causing the accident and in awarding only<\/p>\n
 6l\u00a7\u00b0\/o of the compensation in favour of the petitioner.<\/p>\n
Learned counsei contended that the tribune: has not taken
\ninto consideration the fact that, the owner who was the<\/p>\n
driver of the vehicle was charge sheeted by the police for<\/p>\n
8<\/span><\/p>\n
the accident in question, which is evident from E_r\u00bb.i_?”$i._:’_a.nd<\/p>\n
by not properiy noticing the same, there is a  .<\/p>\n
and iilegality committed by the tnbunai,;resuiitgn\u00a7*finnot * <\/p>\n
awarding the fail compensation an1o;,jint\u00a7’to’\u00bbtn’e::’petitien’er_gA<\/p>\n
Learned counsel contende;i’*–~.V..that,=- tithe i”.:ijL::_antLiVrr\u00e9 Vern’<\/p>\n
compensation arnount deterrni:n:ec_1_ by time is iow
\nand that there is no  e.n\u00e9_ r;ea_s\u00e9$njai):’i’e.,taward passed by
\nthe tribunai. tearnedir’cou~n$ei”t;onteni3eti.v”tnat the tribunal<\/p>\n
has not  cornpensation payable<\/p>\n
under theinieatisc,tines;:ot___depen’dency, toss of consortium
\nane ha’s._n”ot awar}cieci”‘—a:n’y””sum under the head ‘funeral<\/p>\n
experises.’ ‘V ~-\n<\/p>\n
  _ ‘v9_.ePer’:contre, Sri A.M.Veni<atesn, learned ceunsei for<\/p>\n
'tn.e"  in MFA 561\/2004 i.e._. the Insurance<\/p>\n
 Cornpan\ufb01yhveontended that, the tribunal has committed errer<\/p>\n
 \ufb01ne, iiiegaiity in awarding the compensation amount and<\/p>\n
theiding the Insurance Company its be iiataie to pay the<\/p>\n
' compensation dwpite the fact that the accident has<\/p>\n
occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the<\/p>\n
i<\/p>\n
4\/.'<\/p>\n
vehicie by the deceased nimseif. Learned._":coujnsei<\/p>\n
contended that, though the tribunal has neid  <\/p>\n
has occurred due to the deceased.A_r\u00a7.imseiif;'._itxizasg<\/p>\n
committed a material iiiegality in 'thattne.tciai'n}ie.nt~._<\/p>\n
is entitted to compensation. 'unearned counsei uk:o'n'tended ''<\/p>\n
that, the petition having'. been"'fi-led \ufb01nder section 166 of
\nthe Act, it is incumbent oni_:fWtne claimant to
\nplead and proyeitnie  the record of the
\ncase on t:on*\u00a7e':*'.out' that, the deceased
\nhimsei\ufb01was was" instrumental in causing the<\/p>\n
accident, 'was  his own death and his L.Rs.,<\/p>\n
 are entitied"toe_ny compensation under the provisions<\/p>\n
 \u00bbo:f'ti3e .\u00a3tctoend.tne petition is not rnaintainabie. He further<\/p>\n
Hcontend'ed"_"Ltnet;.'v the impugned judgment is not based on<\/p>\n
g proiionreesoning and proper appreciation of pieadings,<\/p>\n
 evuienoe, documents produced and the finding is perverse<\/p>\n
d  and is iiabie to be interfered with.\n<\/p>\n
10. Considering the contentions and record of the<\/p>\n
case, the points that arise for our consideration are:<\/p>\n
f.\n<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
(1) Whether the petitioner has provee.””inat;’.;* <\/p>\n
husband Krishna sustained inj\u00a3J.Fi:\u00e95.in.A_i.the %roa:dA <\/p>\n
traffic accident that  on <\/p>\n
to the rash and>i.negiig4’ent’*drivin\u00a7.”.i_b\u00a7(“ti1e’–dr;vvei\ufb01<\/p>\n
of the Maxi Cab Mbeanng Rea;ric\u00a7’KA$as\u00a7A–2481V<\/p>\n
and succtinsbed_\u00ab’to’:t’i1:ei.iniuries?
\n(2) Whether trig   the tribunai is
\njusi:\u00abi.a;I\u00a51d rea sona  V.  I
\nPoint  V t 4% V
\n wn\u00abii_eVV”a’nswering issue No.1 has
\nheld ti*:at,\u00ab’.tne–  on record substantiates the<\/p>\n
factthat,tneVVpetitioi’ie?”‘\u00a7ias proved issue No.1. Stiii it has<\/p>\n
  proceeded to hVoid”‘tnat the deceased Krishna was driver of<\/p>\n
    time of accident and contriouted to the<\/p>\n
‘accident”‘a:n=d has proceeded to hold that, though he<\/p>\n
 conttiotited to the accident, it cannot be said that the L.Rs.<\/p>\n
 Vare”A_\u00abnot entities to any compensation. it has heid that, by<\/p>\n
  ‘attributing 40% negiigence on the part of the deceased in<\/p>\n
causing the accident, \u00a3055 of dependency couid be awarded<\/p>\n
at Rs.2,4S,,0\ufb01O_f- by awarding 66% T the compensation.<\/p>\n
\/..\n<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
testified that, the accident has taken piece doeeo.’<\/p>\n
and negligent driving of the Maxi Cab  <\/p>\n
having lost the control, the vehicle:A4hes”‘.to;o_pi–ed–..en’dV,her<\/p>\n
husband who was a passenger\u00e9”‘i.n”-the _=:eiiio’ie:, ir*iai1in\u00a2_}g<\/p>\n
sustained bleeding injuries aiiiajover th”e..o:od’\u00a71, shifted
\nto Government Hos’,-ni_te.i,  andviiatyer he was
\nshifted to Victoria  =”~e%r;\u00bbi)_’i.iiance, where he
\nsuccumbed ?t’o’theVinj:i.;riesi.”; her, Channapatna
\npolice   ‘no.11i2oo: against the
\ndriver   him before the
\njurisdildigo\u00e9nai  has produced the police<\/p>\n
regards reiterate the aecident which have been marked as<\/p>\n
  to’~i-‘{_7. Inmh\u00e9er cross examination she has admitted<\/p>\n
I  :Vth__ai;} ‘vtvi\u00a7e.VV’i:iVi.ijegvers informed her regarding the accident and<\/p>\n
she s’aw-,tA\u00ab:”‘her husband at Victoria Hospital after the<\/p>\n
 .Aa;ccide\u00bbn:i:. She has deposed that she does not know<\/p>\n
i’-giresgiondent No.1 Rernegowda and that she has not given<\/p>\n
 = ..—-evidence in criminei case iodged against respondent No.1<\/p>\n
Ramegowda. She has further deposed that on the date of<\/p>\n
accident, her husband was going V Channepetna to<\/p>\n
(“Q3<\/p>\n
1.3<\/p>\n
nurchase neuseneid articles. From her evieence\u00e9,.i..if4*i.\u00e9.’:’eieer\u00ab x<\/p>\n
that, she was not present at the scene of accident,’    <\/p>\n
took mace and she is net an eye,:’t:iii9e:;;; iaiitnees\ufb01<\/p>\n
there is not much materiai in her evidence te_–v_i;nen;4 <\/p>\n
wno was driving the said venicice”‘~and.”vv’ae_ ‘iaeee ‘cease
\nfor accident. Howevei*,~..V_ceri\u00a7:a’i’n ‘ihiaiti\ufb01e-.stete\u00abd’V’ny”Vv:ner are
\nreievani: to be noticed.  VAccni*d\u00a7i’n;g her deceased
\nhusband  did not had
\ndriving iicen\u00e9ee’f,.to:A’u\u00a7iye;e3–ij–$heaeniea the suggestion
\nthat a case’ against her husband as<\/p>\n
the drivef”‘of the  caused the accident. A<\/p>\n
 sugvgesiiidn rnaee~~t9_____ner that her deceased husband was<\/p>\n
 wVni’~i<ing._as% ciilfnfer under Ramegowda and caused accident,<\/p>\n
t'n.e'V.Maxi Cab, has been denied by her. Since<\/p>\n
g evici'ence.pf"i3.W.1 is not of much assistance ta decide as to<\/p>\n
 "Ljwirno-.igvae" driving the venicie at the time of' accident, since<\/p>\n
—  snexveas not an eye\/direct witness to the incident, we have<\/p>\n
” “tee examine the evidence of P.W.2, the petitioner I claimant<\/p>\n
in 1*\/NC 3′?63\/2001, who undisputediy was a passenger in<\/p>\n
the Maxi Cab at the time of accident. \\’
\n\/’<\/p>\n
,-..a<\/p>\n
16<\/span>
\naccepted, in View of the availability of the direct evidence
\nof PW2, who was aiso injured in the very accident itseif.<\/p>\n
The claim petition \ufb02ied by PW2 in MVC 3763\/2ao1Va\u00bb'”nas<\/p>\n
been allowed in part, wherein he has stated<\/p>\n
suffered pain and agony and 3055 due  <\/p>\n
sustained by him in the motor  .a;\u00a2:aea\u00a7;e%aTna <\/p>\n
awards passed in we 3763i2{!{_)1 a}a’a_ 3:252\/2im1A’ ‘I’\u20ac’3a’v”.”i’:l.’i.G’.V <\/p>\n
to the same accident have becafne\ufb01nal. ‘in: saigiaiaim<\/p>\n
petitiona” ai\u00e9o”;   ‘eiairtaants therein was that,
\nthe vehie\ufb01e was dr;i$t.’e9\u00e9j;:._i*’ae_:I:*ii\\,{‘za:nd negligently by the driver<\/p>\n
of Maxi. Cab ancI_’i1:.wvasAnat’~’fheir case therein that deceased<\/p>\n
 V’ ‘*:(risi\u00a3ea was qrivin\ufb01 the’ vehicle.<\/p>\n
   .;-‘V1a?..,::V’:*(\ufb01eesi;i’ering the evidence of PW1, PW2 am: RW1<\/p>\n
  and in tae’!igi’\u00a7ai of the charge-sheet \ufb02ied by the police as<\/p>\n
 “”~._ f:a-erjEx;F*v?A:’on Ramegowda, the owner and driver of the<\/p>\n
 a..’v’ehir:3:e, it has to be new that the accident has occurred on<\/p>\n
   2_2i2.2DO1 because of the rash and negiigent driving as!’ the<\/p>\n
evehicie by Ramegowda. Hence we answer point No.1 in<\/p>\n
the affirmative.\n<\/p>\n
17<\/span><\/p>\n
Point Nag:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
18. PW}. has deposed that n\u00e9i iausb\u00e9zna;’\u00e9{“th\u00e9_i:i\u00a79t1\u00e9”‘*.<\/p>\n
of accident was 25 years of age,  w_a:s;.V_IA.1a1e  ‘vh4:-.~aii’:\u00a7.\u00a7w} ”<\/p>\n
was a hard working agricuitu’e*i\u00a7t,. hoctIcu \ufb01curi%stVAV”‘a’fid’ Was
\ndamg ‘diary farming am’ wa\u00a7”‘enaf{f’nViViig_A Rs.’5;O0Of- pm.
\nwhich he was contr1but’iHg;AV ft)?\u00a7’ha.c: hi\u00a7\u00a7.;\u00a7tenance of his<\/p>\n
family comp1’i*.\u00a7\u00a7n\ufb01VV()f hifnsg\u00e9lfgi  children (1)<\/p>\n
KavyaggvagetixA’\u00e9\u00a3’2*Q1zt 55 y-\u00a7;’ar.$, (2) Shwetha, aged about 3
\nyears, arm 4(3)  about 2 years. She has<\/p>\n
prod;\u00a7ced..rat\u00a7cn ;;’a’rd Es<.P\u00e9, RTC of the iand Exs. P10 and<\/p>\n
E<\/p>\n
\u00e9 11,' ""\u00a7n\u00e9\ufb01tri\u00a7\u00a7u;j:ai haicmassessed the monthiy inccme of the<\/p>\n
ai}ecesse;\u00a7;c\u00abv..;;;'V".cg\u00a7~;3,oo0;– ;).m. or Rs.36,0G0,f– p.a. by<\/p>\n
'  _ noii'\u20acinaf\u00e9ct that the RTC discioses that the deceased<\/p>\n
 t\ufb01e\ufb01wner of 20 games of land at Rucirakshipura<\/p>\n
 c, 'vj}cia-g\u00e9. Without the income of atieast Rs.3,000\/- p.m. the<\/p>\n
  ..:i<.=-c:ce:\u00ab:ser\u00a3 coutd not have been maintained himseif, his wife<\/p>\n
 and 3 minor children. The record discloses that he was an<\/p>\n
agriculturist. Since there is :19 material on the basis at<\/p>\n
\ufb02<\/p>\n
19<\/span><\/p>\n
awarded 60% of the amount as compensatien.  VVir’\u00e9ev=..?.\u00a2_4o’r” <\/p>\n
our finding on point No.1 rabm,r “–,there:”foevin\u00a7: rso ‘j’ <\/p>\n
contributory negligence on the \u00a7)a|*E’.of tne_goAece’aeeud’–~ens<\/p>\n
the deceased being not resaorasibie  ‘she  and
\nsince he has not caused .vrt\ufb01e”Ve.\u00a7ecr:1″dent in”‘qu’estion, the
\npetitioner and her chiiegien  be awarded the<\/p>\n
compensation’ iofjRs.\u00a5\u00a7,0$;\u20ac!i’aG,i\u00a5’;~:  . ‘V _’ ‘ I<\/p>\n
 ‘=~.Tne”.:.j:v{ion_n\u00abai”*vnar\u00a7\ufb01wairdeo Rs.1G,00\u00a3i\/’- towards
\nloss’–,of  banbdHRs–.6,G00\/- towards transportation
\nof cieodi bodyr  Jsthe minor children were not<\/p>\n
Err,-;.piea.dedo “:oV_V’aVrnovunt has been awarded under the head<\/p>\n
 ‘.’_lvov\u00a7a,.%;r.\u00e9A”\u00ab.affection’. Though learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
 ._ ‘s\u00a7e\u00a7it’i’o:n’er eoritenoeo that, no amount has been seoarateiy<\/p>\n
awareedvtowards funerai and oosequies ceremonies, in our<\/p>\n
 A. ‘opinion the amount of Rs.6,GOG,f- which nas been awarded<\/p>\n
 the tribunal under the head ‘transportation of dead<\/p>\n
 body’ inciudes the amount awarciabie under the head<\/p>\n
‘funerai and obsequies ceremonies’. The tritmnai has<\/p>\n
awarded just and reasonabie compenftion. The tribune!<\/p>\n
-f’<\/p>\n
I u<\/p>\n
20<\/span><\/p>\n
has only committed an error in  _<\/p>\n
compensation by attributing 40?\/\u00a7.,, \u00bb_negiigen::.e_~\u00bboi:o: ‘-thee’  <\/p>\n
deceased, which was without 1′:i,ror::er..:’ a’pn_re\u00a2i’etitrne-.._\u00abeff<\/p>\n
evidence on record and tnerei_i$~,en iiiegaiity inietnm\ufb02erj in <\/p>\n
that regard. Considering tne_i:”‘ege*~._\u00bband.” i\u00abneo_mefi of the
\ndeceased, the just anti reesonebi.e:voo’nj*;ie’n.sation which the
\npetitioner is entitied to tie’a~\u00e9\u00a7ierded__ie’.’F\u00a7.e}i;23i,000i~. Point<\/p>\n
No.2 is answei*ed  <\/p>\n
ivriutuiie  \ufb01iedibyv the Insurance Company
\n(MFA 7557\/e2oo4;)igdissnissed and the apnea! filed by the<\/p>\n
claimant  VSE%23-;%’2ViiJii4) is aiiowed in part. The<\/p>\n
‘JV”-..corrn:ierieat\u00e9vo.n paS_}a*i3’ie’ by the Insurance Company to the<\/p>\n
 e._.a”‘;:Vi\u00a2;’V3eii-‘v1:”r*:’i_’.:V:i\u00ab.~:'”determined at Rs.4,24,oooi–, which shaii carry<\/p>\n
intereste.ati\u00e9\u00a76; p.a. from the date of petition tin the date or<\/p>\n
 depositV7__A’1-The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the<\/p>\n
 amount within a period of 3 months from today.<\/p>\n
e\u00e9fter the amount is deposited, the tribunal is hereby<\/p>\n
directed to deposit in any Nationalised Bank a sum of
\nRs.1,00,DOO\/- each, with proportionate ‘Eterest, in the<\/p>\n
\/L<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008 Author: K.L.Manjunath & Gowda 1!! me man counsr or unnnwgn Ar”sAii%;;Amg\u00a3%. ‘ ” V mrrsn 11:15 me 13*” um! g.L1:;ti4.sji’,.’i’eds;[i”?\u00ab..\u00ab PRE3E\ufb01T ‘VV_ me I-IOWBLE MR. Jv.51’1%\u00a3:E _V\u00a7(.s.V, _ “ms uorrms HR. Jusr\ufb01f\ufb01 eowm M:sce=,gaanerms\u00ab.Ta\u00a7=f;rst %’_&pi:ae a ‘i N’o\u00e9.S’\u20ac\u00a723…(Z\u00a7FA;004 mv) Misceilai\ufb01\u00e9cii\ufb01-3..First .A’b-be-.aTNo.?’v$5’7 CF 2904 ( MV) […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29197","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-10-19T00:00:08+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-19T00:00:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2708,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-19T00:00:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-10-19T00:00:08+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-19T00:00:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008"},"wordCount":2708,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008","name":"Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-19T00:00:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shashikala-vs-ramegowda-on-18-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shashikala vs Ramegowda on 18 August, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29197","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29197"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29197\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29197"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29197"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29197"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}