Karnataka High Court
The Managing Director vs Sri Chikkaraju on 14 June, 2017
Author: B.Manohar
Bench: B. Manohar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE, 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B. MANOHAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8078/2015 (MVC)
BETWEEN:
The Managing Director,
B.M.T.C Bengaluru Central Office,
K.H. Road, Shanthinagar,
Bengaluru-27.
(R.C. Owner of BMTC Bus
No.KA-01-FA-1327)
Now through
Chief Law Officer,
BMTC, Bengaluru.
...Appellant
(By Sri. Nagaraja. K, Advocate)
AND:
1. Sri. Chikkaraju,
S/o Sri. Veerabhadre Gowda,
Aged about 51 years,
2. Smt. Gowramma,
W/o Sri. Chikkaraju,
Aged about 38 years,
3. Sri. Pramod. C,
S/o Sri. Chikkaraju,
Aged about 24 years,
All are R/at No.46, 4th Cross,
Coconut Garden, Bannerghatta Road,
Bengaluru-560 076.
...Respondents
(By Sri. H.T. Jagadeesh, Advocate for R1 to R3)
2
This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under
Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, against the
Judgment and award dated 10.08.2015 passed in MVC
No.5223/2014 on the file of the Judge Court of Small
Causes, 26th ACMM, (SCCH-09), Bengaluru, awarding a
compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- with interest at the rate
of 6% p.a from the date of petition till its realization.
This M.F.A. coming on for Orders this day, the Court
delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
The Managing Director, BMTC, Bangalore has filed this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of Judgment and award dated 10.08.2015 made in MVC No.5223/2014 passed by the Judge, Court of Small Causes, and MACT, Bengaluru (herein after referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short).
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
The respondent Nos.1 to 3 herein filed a claim petition contending that son of the claimant Nos.1 and 2 and brother of the third claimant deceased C.Mahantesh, on 24.11.2014 while he was proceeding 3 on motor cycle bearing Reg. No.KA-05-HV-1736 near Iqbal Auto Engineering Works, 9th main road, Yarab Nagar, Bengaluru, a BMTC bus bearing Reg. No.KA-01-
FA-1327 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the motor cycle. Due to that the deceased C.Mahantesh fell down and sustained fatal injuries to the entire body. Subsequently, he succumbed to the said injuries. In the claim petition it was contended that at the time of death of deceased, he was aged about 20 years and was studying in 5th semester BBM course. Due to the negligence on the part of driver of the BMTC bus, accident occurred. Hence sought for the compensation of sum of Rs.25,00,000/-.
3. The BMTC defended the case by filing written statement and contended that due to rash and negligent riding of the motor cycle, the accident occurred. Hence, BMTC is not liable to pay compensation and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
4. On the pleadings of the parties the tribunal framed necessary issues. The first claimant got 4 examined as PW-1 and got marked the documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.17. On behalf of the respondents, none of the witnesses were examined nor any documents marked.
5. The Tribunal, after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence let in by the parties, taking into consideration the copy of the MV report, spot sketch, copy of complaint and charge sheet, held that due to actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the BMTC bus, the accident occurred and deceased C.Mahantesh died on the spot. The claimants are father, mother and the brother of the deceased and are entitled for compensation.
6. With regard to quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal taking the notional income of the deceased as Rs.7,000/- p.m adding 50% towards the loss of future prospectus; as he was bachelor at the time of accident, deducting 50% there of towards the personal expenses and applying multiplier of 18 as he was aged about 20 years, awarded a sum of Rs.11,34,000/- towards the loss of dependency and 5 sum of Rs.25,000/- towards loss of love and affection to the parents and brother; a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards transportation of dead body and sum of Rs16,000/- towards the loss of estate; in all, awarded a sum of Rs.12,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. The liability was passed on to BMTC bus to compensate the claimant. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, BMTC has preferred this appeal.
7. I have heard Sri. K.Nagaraja, advocate appearing for appellant and Sri.H.T.Jagadeesh, advocate appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Perused the judgment and award, oral and documentary evidence.
8. Though the appellant has taken a contention with regard to negligence on the part of the rider of the motor cycle, no documents have been produced to substantiate the same. The driver of the BMTC has not been examined to prove the negligence on the part of the rider of the motor cycle. With regard to the quantum of compensation is concerned and the issue with regard 6 to the awarding of future prospectus is concerned, the same is pending before larger Bench. When the Tribunal has taken notional income of Rs.7,000/-p.m, taking the loss of future prospectus at 50% on the notional income, is contrary to law.
9. However the income of Rs.7,000/- taken by the Tribunal for the death of a 20 year old BBM 5th semester student is on the lower side. Even for an agricultural labourer, or a daily wager working in various Government departments income is being taken as Rs.8,000/- p.m. in the year 2014. In the absence of future prospectus, taking the income of the deceased as Rs.9,000/- p.m., deducting 50% as he was bachelor as on the date of accident, applying multiplier of 18 as per judgment of the Supreme Court reported in 2015 (6) SCC 347 in "Munnalal Jain and another v/s Vipin Kumar Sharma and others", the claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.9,72,000/- towards the loss of dependency as against Rs.11,34,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further, the claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards the loss of love and affection and a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards 7 conventional heads. In all the claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.10,72,000/- as against Rs.12,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with 6% interest p.a.
10. Accordingly I pass the following, ORDER The appeal is allowed in part.
Judgment and award dated 10.08.2015 made in MVC No.5223/2014 passed by the Judge, Court of Small Causes, 26th ACMM (SCCH-09), Bengaluru, is modified. The claimant is entitled for compensation of Rs.10,72,000/- with 6% interest p.a. as against Rs.12,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The amount in deposit before this court, be transferred to MACT, Bengaluru for disbursement.
SD/-
JUDGE LL/NS