Karnataka High Court
North West Karnataka Road Transport ... vs Dundappa Ramappa Rakshi (Deceased) By ... on 9 September, 2005
Equivalent citations: II(2007)ACC312, AIR 2006 (NOC) 748 (KAR), 2006 (2) AIR KANT HCR 167, 2006 A I H C 1003, (2006) 3 ACJ 2100, (2007) 2 ACC 312, 2006 (2) AIR KAR R 167
Author: K. Sreedhar Rao
Bench: K. Sreedhar Rao
JUDGMENT K. Sreedhar Rao, J.
1. Petitioner in M.V.C. No. 1283 of 1995 sustained crush injury in the middle of the left leg in the motor vehicle accident. Petitioner took treatment at Ramdurg Hospital and at the K.M.C. Hospital, Hubli. Petitioner was an in patient for about a month and continued treatment as an out patient. Petitioner died during the pendency of the petition. His legal representatives have been brought on record. Accident occurred on 18.3.1995. The petitioner died on 13.10.1997. On the basis of the evidence of the Homoeopathy doctor, PW 3, the Tribunal holds that the death is on account of injuries sustained in the accident and awarded compensation of Rs. 82,000 with interest at 9 per cent from the date of petition till the date of payment. The K.S.R.T.C. is in appeal.
2. The finding of the Claims Tribunal that death is on account of the injuries sustained in the accident only on the basis of oral evidence of Homoeopathic doctor is untenable. There is no evidence to show that petitioner suffered chronic injuries, the cause of death is not forthcoming. Death occurred almost 2½ years after the accident. The Full Bench of this Court in Kannamma v. Dy. General Manager Karnataka State Road Trans. Corporation. I (1991) ACC 421 (FB) : 1991 ACJ 707 (Karnataka) and Uttam Kumar v. Madhav I (2006) ACC 378 (FB) : 2002 ACJ 1828 (Karnataka), has held that if a person injured in a motor vehicle accident dies for the reasons other than the injuries caused in the accident, the legal representatives are entitled to claim compensation to the extent of loss to estate and not towards loss of dependency and other general damages. The medical expenses and loss of income during treatment would constitute loss to estate.
3. Keeping in view the nature of injuries and the period of treatment taken by the petitioner, it is reasonable to award Rs. 25,000 towards medical expenses and incidental charges relating to treatment. The petitioner was laid up for about four months on account of the injuries. Therefore, a sum of Rs. 6,000 is to be awarded towards loss of earnings during laid up period. In all, the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner are entitled to Rs. 31,000 with interest at 6 per cent from the date of petition till date of payment as against Rs. 82,000 awarded by the Claims Tribunal.
4. The amount in deposit to be transferred to the Tribunal for payment.