IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO M.F.A.No.3242/2019 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BMTC CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027, REP. BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER. ..APPELLANT (BY SRI F.S.DABALI, ADVOCATE) AND:
1 . MRS AMALOR PAMERI W/O LATE PETER, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/AT NO.280, HESARAGHATTA ROAD, MEDI AGRAHARA, VADERAHALLI, MUNESHWARA LAYOUT, POST VIDHYARANYAPURA, BANGALORE-560 097.
2 . MR ALPHOTS, S/O LATE ANTONY, AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS, R/AT NO.280, HESARAGHATTA ROAD, MEDI AGRAHARA, VADERAHALLI, MUNESHWARA LAYOUT, POST VIDHYARANYAPURA, BANGALORE-560 097.
3 . MRS MARY W/O MR.ALPHOTS, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT NO.280, HESARAGHATTA ROAD, MEDI AGRAHARA, VADERAHALLI, MUNESHWARA LAYOUT, POST VIDHYARANYAPURA, BANGALORE-560 097.
4 . KUM AKSHAYA JOICE D/O LATE PETER, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, SINCE RESPONDENT NO.4 IS MINOR REP. BY HER MOTHER AS A NATURAL GUARDIAN MRS.AMALOR PAMERI RESPONDENT NO.1 R/AT NO.280, HESARAGHATTA ROAD, MEDI AGRAHARA, VADERAHALLI, MUNESHWARA LAYOUT, POST VIDHYARANYAPURA, BANGALORE-560 097. ..RESPONDENTS THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.02.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.5970/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXXIV ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.14,20,000/- ALONG WITH FUTURE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALISATION OF ENTIRE AMOUNT.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT The appeal is listed for admission and it is taken up for final disposal.
Appeal is directed against the Judgment and award dated 01.02.2019 passed in MVC No.5970/2017 by the IX Additional Small Causes Judge and XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Member, MACT-7, Bengaluru, wherein claim petition came to be allowed in part and an amount of Rs.14,20,000/- with future interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization of entire amount came to be granted to the petitioners. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award corporation has preferred this appeal.
2. In order to avoid confusion and overlapping, parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.
3. Claim petition came to be filed by wife, child and parents of the deceased Peter. The details of the accident are: On 15.06.2017 at about 9.00 P.M. deceased was riding the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-04-HY-3009 along with pillion rider on Hesaraghatta Main Road, Lakshmipura, Bengaluru, the rider of motorcycle rode the same slowly and cautiously. Near Kolathuru Farm, the driver of BMTC bus bearing registration No.KA-01-FA-2168 drove the same in high speed, rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle from opposite direction and as a result deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries all over the body. Peter succumbed to the injuries on 16.06.2017 at about 4.00 a.m.
4. Learned Member has granted compensation of Rs.14,20,000/- as per the following break up:
SL.NO. DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1. For loss of consortium Rs. 40,000/-
2. For loss of love and affection 3. For funeral, obsequies, ceremony and conveyance Rs. 15,000/- Rs. 15,000/-
4. For loss of dependency Rs.13,50,000/- Total Rs.14,20,000/-
5. Insofar as loss of dependency is concerned monthly income is considered at Rs.9,000/- and considering the age of deceased at 40 years at the time of death 25% is added towards future prospects and 1/3rd is deducted towards personal and living expenses. Compensation under conventional heads at Rs.70,000/-.
6. Learned counsel for appellant Sri Dabali would submit that the quantum is unreasonably on the higher side considering the fact that the deceased was a coolie and could not have earned Rs.9,000/- per month.
7. The contention of corporation is not accepted by virtue of available facts that on investigation final report under Section 173(2) came to be filed against the driver of the bus.
8. In the context and circumstances of the case, I do not find exorbitant in either consideration of notional income at the rate of Rs.9,000/- and future prospect of 25% in the light of the age of deceased being 40 years as on the date of accident. On the other hand future prospects should have been considered at 40%. Loss of dependency would be:
Rs.9,000 x40% future prospects = Rs.3,600/- (Rs.9,000+3,600)Rs.12,600-1/3(personal expenses)=4,200/-
(12,600-4,200)=8400x12x15=Rs.15,12,000/-
Conventional heads 70,000/-
Total compensation Rs.15,82,000/-
========= 9. The claimants have not preferred appeal seeking enhancement despite the fact that it is duty of the court or Tribunal to assess the just and fair compensation. On the other hand it is not just for the reason of non-preferring of appeal, the matter cannot be brushed aside on hyper technical ground. Of course aid of Order 41 Rule 33 of CPC can be invoked.
In the over all circumstances appeal filed by the corporation is devoid of merits and stands rejected.
However compensation stands enhanced by (Rs.15,82,000-14,20,000) Rs.1,62,000/-. To that extent impugned Judgment and award is modified.
Corporation is directed to deposit balance compensation including enhanced compensation with interest @ 6% p.a. within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Office is directed to transmit the amount in deposit.
Since there is no representation by virtue of non issuance of notice to the respondents, the tribunal shall cause notice to jurisdictional legal services authority to inform the claimants and to see that the co-operation is extended for getting the compensation as per this order.
Sd/- JUDGE SBN