IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N. SATYANARAYANA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3494/2015 (MV) BETWEEN:
SMT. SAROJAMMA W/O LATE PUTTASWAMY AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS RESIDING AT KUNTANAHALLI VILLAGE KOPPA HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-571 428 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI ANANDA K., ADVOCATE) AND:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER K.S.R.T.C.
K.S.R.T.C. BUS STOP MANDYA-571 421 (BUS NO.KA-09-F-3783) (BY SRI K.N. DAYALU, ADVOCATE) ...RESPONDENT THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:20.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.194/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, MADDUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, SATYANARAYANA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT The claimant in MVC.No.194/2014 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Maddur, has come up in this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for the death of her only son Mallesha.
2. The accident involving Hero Honda CD 100 Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02-R-5495 (on which the deceased was traveling) with KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-09-F-3783 is not in dispute. So also the death of Mallesha, who suffered injury in the said accident and having succumbed to the same as on the date of the accident itself is also not in dispute. The claim petition came to be filed by his mother seeking compensation for his death, where she has contended that her son was working as a Labourer in a hotel on a monthly salary of Rs.8,000/-. However, no evidence is led to establish his employment and income. In the absence of the same, as it is normally done, the notional income which is taken into consideration on the basis of the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is Rs.8,000/- p.m. in a case where the accident has taken place in the year 2013.
3. Therefore, by applying the aforesaid analogy, the income of deceased Mallesha is notionally taken at Rs.8,000/-. Since he was aged about 30 years and was employed in a private sector, 40% future prospects is considered. Hence, the monthly income to be taken to calculate loss of dependency works out to Rs.11,200/- per month (8,000+3,200). After deducting 50% towards personal expenses of the deceased, the income of the deceased available to his dependents would be Rs.5,600/- p.m. If the same is considered per annum, it would come to Rs.67,200/- (5,600x12). Since the deceased was aged about 30 years as on the date of the accident, the multiplier which is required to be adopted is 17 with which the total compensation payable towards ‘loss of dependency’ would be Rs.11,42,400/- (5,600x12x17). To this, another sum of Rs.40,000/- is added towards conventional heads. With this, the total compensation payable to the claimant is Rs.11,82,400/- as against the compensation of Rs.6,52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, out of which Rs.15,000/- has been paid by the respondent as interim compensation.
4. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part, enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.6,37,000/- to Rs.11,82,400/-. The appellant is entitled for an enhanced compensation amount of Rs.5,45,400/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. till the date of deposit of the entire amount by the respondent – KSRTC.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE CA