IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT M.F.A.No.3023/2014 [MV] BETWEEN:
SRI HANUMANTHRAYAPPA @ NALLAPPA @ KOLLAPPAGARI HANUMANTHARAYAPPA S/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA @ GURAPPA AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS NO.3-52, SOMAGHATTA VILLAGE M RAYAPURAM, ROLLA MANDAL ANATHAPURAM DISTRICT ANDRAPRADESH PRESENTLY R/AT C/O NAGESH NO.27, 3RD CROSS, PRASANNA LAYOUT SUNKADAKATTE, BANGALORE.
(BY SRI. R LAKSHMANA, ADV.) AND:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR A P S R T C MUSHEERABAD HYDERABAD ANDRAPRADESH-513101.
(BY SRI.D VIJAYA KUMAR, ADV.) ...APPELLANT …RESPONDENT THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 10.07.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.5932/2012 ON THE FILE OF XIII ADDL.
SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND MEMBER MACT, BANGALORE, 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:
JUDGMENT The claimant is in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded under the judgment and award dated 10.07.2013 passed in MVC No 5932/2012 on the file of MACT, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore.
2. The claim petition was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation on account of damage caused to the bullock cart and death of two bullocks in a Road Traffic Accident. It is stated that on 19.10.2011 when the claimant was proceeding in his bullock cart at Puresanghanahalli Village, Madakasira Taluk, Ananthapura District, an APSRTC Bus bearing Reg.No.AP-11-Z-2611 driven in high speed, rash and negligent manner dashed to the claimants' bullock cart. As a result, the bullock cart turtled and due to the impact two bullocks died and the Bullock Cart was badly damaged.
3. On issuance of summons the respondent – Corporation appeared and filed its written statement, denied the claim petition averments and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. The claimant examined himself as PW.1 and also examined PWs.2 and 3 – the Doctor and one Naresh respectively, apart from marking the documents Exs.P1 to P17. Respondents examined RW.1. The Tribunal on scrutiny of the material on record awarded total compensation of Rs.70,000/- along with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization on the following heads :-
1. Death of each bullock (Rs.20,000/- x 2) Rs.40,000/-
2. Transportation and religious
4. Not being satisfied with quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant/claimant is in appeal before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent - Corporation. Perused the entire material on record.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side when compared to the damage caused to the bullock cart and the death of two bullocks. It is his submission that the Tribunal without properly appreciating Ex.P11 - the certificate issued by the Veterinary Surgeon awarded compensation which is on the lower side. He further submits that to repair the damage caused to the bullock cart, the claimant has spent more than Rs.40,000/- whereas the Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/-. Further the claimant states that he was wholly depending on the income derived from the bullock cart. The Tribunal has failed to award any compensation for the loss of income. Thus prays for enhancement of compensation.
7. Per contra learned counsel for respondent - Corporation submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper, which needs no interference.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the material on record, the only point that arise for consideration is as to 'Whether the claimant would be entitled for enhancement of compensation in the facts and circumstances of the case?' The said point is answered partly in the affirmative for the following reasons :-
The occurrence of the accident on 19.10.2011 involving the bullock cart and the APSRTC Bus bearing Reg.No.AP-11-Z-2611 and the accidental death of two bullocks and the damage caused to the bullock cart are not in dispute in this appeal. The claimant's appeal is for enhancement of compensation. The claimant relies upon Ex.P.11 - the certificate issued by the Veterinary Inspector, wherein he has valued the rate of the bullocks at Rs.25,000/- each. The Tribunal taking note of Ex.P.11 - the report of the Veterinary Inspector rightly awarded Rs.20,000/- each towards two bullocks which needs no interference. Further the learned counsel stated that the claimant has incurred more than Rs.40,000/- towards repair of the bullock cart, but he has not placed on record any bills in support of his claim. Therefore, the Tribunal in the absence of any material has awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards repair of the bullock cart, which is also just and proper. The next contention of the claimant is that the claimant was wholly depending on the income derived by the use of bullock cart for his livelihood. Due to the death of the two bullocks and damage caused to the bullock cart, the claimant would have suffered loss of income for a minimum period of three months. It would have taken minimum of three months to get new bullocks and to get the bullock cart repaired. Thus I am of the view, that the claimant would be entitled for global compensation of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of income for a period of three months.
9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and awarded is modified to the above extent. The claimant would be entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.20,000/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.70,000/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
Sd/- JUDGE NG* CT:bms