Karnataka High Court
Saroja Sadhu W/O Lt Karunapur Lazarus vs The Managing Director Bmtc on 13 July, 2010
Bench: K.Bhakthavatsala, Ravi Malimath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 13"" DAY OF JULY 2010
PRESENT
THE I-ION'BLE rm. JUSTICE K. % T '
AND
THE 1-1oN*ELE MR. JUSTICE 2 "
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST ApPE.z§gL..No.S203'/'-zooswiizj J
BETWEEN
1. Smt. Saroja Sadhu, ..
W/0 late Sri Karunapur Lazarus» _ V
Since deceased, by
Appellant No.2. "
2. Aishwarya SVa€1hw'_1',r*E,.' _ ._
8/ 0 late Srl Kaarfunapkiri'La;a<rus--,.'V
Age: 32 years. ' ' V " '
Both are r/() No;32,.__'1AO.¥" Mair}, 2?'.'_'.."<.Cr0ss,
R K Layout, Padmanabhanagaf-. '
Ban_ashank;:2.3j1 IIL'Stage, " _ _
Bafiga1ore_'- * ~ V H """ " Appellants
{By Sr: Adv., for
Sri Veere'S_h«B"Pa{i1_, for appellants)
pm E
I 1 ., Mar: aging" Director,
' -- .. p ntinagar, ~ "
' Ba~ng'a1'0re.;
2. The Self Insurance Fund.
Bl.\/ETC. Shantinagar.
Bangalore.
3. Y B Krishnappa. » _ ~ V " V.
S/o Belakki Ningaiah. (Deleted). Re.spon--dpent's._. .
(By Srnt. H R Renuka. Adv., for R1 and 2) _ 1 l . it
(R43 is deleted]
This Miscellaneous First Appeal'v--.is"V--fiied under_S_ect~ioriV"l73(l] of
the l\/iotor Vehicles Act. against the judgment' and award dated
4.11.2004 passed in MVC No.55.2/2003 the file of"VI=Addl. SCJ 81
Member, MACT, Bangalore. ;Noi--.2,, "p_art'l3r_ allowing the claim
petition for compensation and seekingerihancernent: of compensation
with interest at 12% p€I'AEtI'1I'1uI1'l_..._ _ V " ..
This Appeal Dr. Bhakthavatsala,
J.. delivered the follo'wing:'».»--';--_V ' 'V ~
The mother" and the deceased~Manmohan Sadhu.
are before t'.hiS_VCour't', pvrayiingllforenhancement of compensation in MVC
No'.j'552./ on.:tll.ezfileA Voffiourt of Small Causes/Addl. Motor Accident
ClaitrI'sp_lTrilT)_u:1a'}v._at :B'a,:n.galore City.
'V2. Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant
;No.Vi,"/_ii1ot.l'ier oiflthe deceased, passed away during the pendency of this
it-4'Appeal "appellant No.2 is the legal representative of the deceased.
lx/.
He further submits that the deceased-Manrnohan Saclhu was earning
Rs.78.000/-- per annum from all sources viz., owning two Ci.typTaxis,
online share trading, I--finite Solutions Pvt. Ltd.. I11te_1:i.oi".lVl3ec.ol*a.tor
Consulting and Megacity Developers. But. t.he Tribunal'
income at Rs.3,000/-- per month. He also' the:'.~CS1'airni'.
petition was filed under Section 183 of it
short, 'the Act'). As per Schedule II to as the
deceased was 40 years old, muvltiplier ltopbe applied land 1 /3rd of
the income shall be expenses, but the
Tribunal has deducted 431% 'personal expenses
and applied multiplied' 's.1ibmitfs'~ deceased met with
an accident on. Vvasl_t_ifveated in St. John's Medical
College Hospital and and a sum of Rs.2,20,000/-
was spent towarldssppmedlicailpehpyinses. Apart from that a sum of
Rs.§.Q,OOO/ spent" Ilourishment and attendant charges,
butlthel'l'1=ibunal:.has"~--not awarded adequate compensation. Therefore,
. he prays ~foi*._e'11han'c.er'n;ent of compensation.
3. Lea1'11e(i. Ctjauriscl appearing for the respondent Nos} and
' subniits that the Claim petition filed under Section 163 A of Actllitselliis not maintainable if he income of the deceased is more than Rs.40.000/-- per annum. However, the Tribunal has reasonably fixed the income at Rs.3.000/- as there is no proof regarding t.lf1e--.inconie as pleaded in the claim petition. She also submits the petition is under Section 163 A of the Act. as per claimants are entitled to seek general da.ma'gesl'a.-3 ¢_i1'i»;ed.; Slciiedluleb, T. i but t.he Tribunal has awarded Rs.45,:OOO/ Rs.10.000/-- towards love and lossof estate and Rs.10.000/-- towards' andilfunerial expenses and awarded in all the Corporation has not disputed aboutgjthe land award and the same was satisfied" igood~Wpgrot1nd made out for enhancement of it A
4. Lea1~11ed submits that though the deceased was per month, the claim may be restricted was eai"ningbRs.40.000/ -- per annum. the records of the Tribunal.
V by _ 6. cL:§i1h'vpiet:ition was filed by the mother. aged about. 65 years éancbeplderpuosister aged about 32 years. Claiming compensation in all to Rs.T/6.20.000/-- towards the death of l\/ianmohan Sadhu statiiigthat the monthly income of the deceased was Rs.78.000/-- per L_ month. In support of the case of the claimants, Managing Director of I--Fir1ite Solutions Private Limited was examined to esta'olishf"thai' the deceased was working as a Senior Marketing EX€C'L1J['1'\='€_..O.I'1:'3$l'-iftlllltial salary of Rs. l,20,000/~ and monthly break up salary per month. Ex.P.24 is the Pan Card of the'Jdeceas_ed, .;It bcrystal clear'. that the deceased was assessee under theiiélricozpne produced accounts extract from E3anl;'...;4l3;\Vi=-~.._;ndiaV., lifiptvhlllregardllto the loan taken for Taxi purpose and etc. View, there is no impediment to fix the incorne' Rs.4.LO,0OO/- per annum. According to_ Section Schedule II, We deduct 1/3" of the it expenses and apply multiplier '16' tinder:
{1} Loss .
(Rs.26,sE'_)t37./- x_11s}v " Rs.4,26,672-00 _ tn) «EN;/diedical e><tp'en:sesH Rs. 15,000-00 in . éviexpenses Rs. 2,000-00 A[l'\./E' Rs. 2,500-oo S Total §sf£;?isI%§fsB""
' it :.sss;" Compensation awarded V' _ the Tribuiial Rs.3,22,000~O0 Balance Rs. 1,2-fl, 172-O0 iiiiiiiiiiiiii "
Thus, the appellants / claimants are entitled for additional compensation of Rs. 1.24, 172/--.
7. in the result, the Appeal is partly allowed. appellants/claimants are entitled for ad'di€ional ta:-p;,pehsa::on_, oi". Rs.1,24.172/-- along with costs and intei'-est:._A_Aat'lv fatle annum from the date of petition'l.il'i~...prealisation.:lvAC'e_o1*dingly, the impugned judgment and awardfiare mod_ilfiAed_. Since appellant No.1 is deadi litheent1i*eVv_add,ii;ional compensation amount shall be paid to of appellant No. 1.
RespondentlNo.'-1/ is directed to deposit the additional compensation 'a:n6un£ costs and interest with the 'I'I'il:)un4a.l..\>\ritl1in; "rnontI"1v.s"f-roVIVpr1'today. ' JUDGE