IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT M.F.A.No.1195/2014 [MV] BETWEEN:
1. NANJUNDASWAMY S/O THIMMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, 2. SMT.SUNANDA W/O NANJUNDASWAMY, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O SAMUDRAVALLI VILLAGE, NUGGEHALLY HOBLI, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK.
HASSAN DISTRICT-573201. (BY SRI.GIRISH B BALADARE, ADV.) AND:
DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER K.S.R.T.C CHIKKAMANGALORE DIVISION, CHIKKAMANGALORE REPRESENTED BY: DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, K.S.R.T.C HASSAN DIVISION, HASSAN-573201 ... APPELLANTS …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.D VIJAY KUMAR, ADV.) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.01.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.66/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, CH ANNARAYAPATNA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS M.F.A COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T The appellants/claimants are in appeal praying for enhancement of compensation, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded under the judgment and award dated 03.01.2013 passed in MVC No.66/2011 on the file of Senior Civil Judge & MACT at Channarayapatna.
2. The claimants filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation for the death of one Kumari Nidhi, who was aged 10 years as on the date of accident. Claimants are parents of the deceased. It is stated that on 07.05.2011, when the daughter of the claimants along with one Devarajaiah were proceeding on Motor Bike bearing Reg.No.KA.13-W-2995, on the left side of B.M. Road, Near Nuggehalli Cross, Channarayapattana Town, at that time the driver of a KSRTC Bus bearing Reg.No.KA-18-F-362 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motor bike. As a result, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries.
3. On issuance of summons, the respondent – Corporation appeared before the Tribunal and filed its objection denying the petition averments. Further it is stated that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding of the motor bike and not by the driver of the bus. Claimant No.1 was examined as PW.1 and another witness Ramesh was examined as PW.2, apart from marking Exs.P1 to P10. Respondent examined RW.1 - the driver of the bus. The Tribunal based on the material placed on record awarded global compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
4. While awarding compensation the Tribunal relied on a decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in 2005 ACJ- 99:2005(1)TAC-609(SC). The claimants not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, are before this Court in this appeal.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation. Perused the entire material on record.
6. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the deceased was aged 10 years as on the date of accident and the parents have lost the love and affection of their young daughter. It is his further submission that the claimants would be entitled for compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- and relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in KISHAN GOPAL Vs. LALA reported in (2014) 1 SCC 244.
7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent–Corporation submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal taking note of the fact that the accident is of the year 2011 is just and proper, which needs no interference.
8. On hearing the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the material on record, the only point that arise for consideration is as to “Whether the claimants would be entitled for enhancement of compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case?” Answer to the said point is in the affirmative for the following reasons :
The claimants are parents of Kumari Nidhi who was aged about 10 years as on the date of accident. The accident occurred on 07.05.2011 involving Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-13-w-2995 and the KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-18-F-362 and accidental death of Kumari Nidhi are not in dispute in this appeal. The claimants contend that they would be entitled for compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- based on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in KISHAN GOPAL’s case cited supra. In KISHAN GOPAL’s case, taking note of II Schedule to Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the value of the rupee assessed the notional income at Rs.30,000/- per annum and applied the multiplier of ‘15’. Further the Tribunal awarded Rs.50,000/- on conventional heads. By following the said decision and taking note of the rupee value as on this day, in the present case also, I am of the view, that as the deceased was aged 10 years as on the date of accident, notional income could be assessed at Rs.30,000/- per annum and multiplier of ‘15’ could be applied. Further Rs.50,000/- could be awarded on conventional heads. Thus the claimants would be entitled for Rs.5,00,000/- global compensation including the compensation awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and award is modified and the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation in a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as against Rs.2,50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
10. This Court by order dated 8.4.2014 condoned the delay and denied interest for the delayed period. Accordingly, the claimants would not be entitled for interest for 315 days delayed period.
Sd/- JUDGE NG*CT:bms