Bangalore District Court
In M.V.C.No.6078/2013 Had Filed The ... vs No.2 on 6 January, 2016
IN THE COURT OF THE IX ADDL. SMALL CAUSES AND ADDL.
MACT., BANGALORE, (SCCH-7)
Dated this, the 6th day of January, 2016.
PRESENT : SMT.INDIRA MAILSWAMY CHETTIYAR,
B.Com.,LL.B.(Spl),L.L.M.,
IX Addl. Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM,
Court of Small Causes,
Member, MACT-7, Bangalore.
M.V.C.No.6078/2013
C/w. M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and 3459/2014
Sri.Gangaraju.C.N., ..... PETITIONER IN
S/o Sri.Narasimhappa, M.V.C.No.6078/2013
Aged about 30 years,
Residing at No.46,
Kodigehalli,
Sadaramangal,
Banglaroe-560 068.
(By Sri.D.Devaraj, Adv.,)
V/s
1. Sri. M. Kotresh, .....RESPONDENTS IN
S/o Sri. Neelakantaiah, M.V.C.No.6078/2013
Aged about 32 years,
Residing at 4th Cross,
Bharath Colony,
Davanagere.
(Driver of the Bus bearing No.KA-01-
F-9340)
2. The Managing Director,
Karnataka State Road Transport
Corporation,
Head Office,
SCCH-7 2 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
K.H. Road,
Shanthinagar,
Bangalore-560 027.
(Registered owner of the Bus bearing
No.KA-01-F-9340)
(R-1 Deleted)
(R-2 By Sri. Mahadevaiah, Adv.,)
1. Sri.Narahari Y.V., ..... PETITIONERS IN
S/o Late Y.N.Venkata Rao, M.V.C.No.6127/2013
Aged about 29 years.
2. Sri.Adithya Y.V.,
S/o Late Y.N.Venkata Rao,
Aged about 20 years.
Both are residing at
C/o B.Veerappa,
No.19/2, 3rd Cross,
Karnashree Layout,
Medahalli,
K.R.Puram,
Bangalore-560 036.
(By Sri.D.Devaraj, Adv.,)
V/s
1. Sri. M. Kotresh, .....RESPONDENTS IN
S/o Sri. Neelakantaiah, M.V.C.No.6127/2013
Aged about 32 years,
Residing at 4th Cross,
Bharath Colony,
Davanagere.
(Driver of the Bus bearing No.KA-01-
F-9340)
2. The Managing Director,
SCCH-7 3 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
Karnataka State Road Transport
Corporation,
Head Office,
K.H.Road,
Shanthinagar,
Bangalore-560 027.
(Registered owner of the Bus bearing
No.KA-01-F-9340)
(R-1 Deleted)
(R-2 By Sri.Mahadevaiah, Adv.,)
1. Sri.Narahari Y.V., ..... PETITIONERS IN
S/o Late Y.N.Venkata Rao, M.V.C.No.3459/2014
Aged about 29 years.
2. Sri.Adithya Y.V.,
S/o Late Y.N.Venkata Rao,
Aged about 20 years.
Both are residing at
C/o B.Veerappa,
No.19/2, 3rd Cross,
Karnashree Layout,
Medahalli,
K.R.Puram,
Bangalore-560 036.
At also;
No.2, Yalagalavadi,
Huthridurga,
Huthri,
Tumkur.
At also;
Kunigal Taluk,
Yalagaravadi,
Tumkur.
SCCH-7 4 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
(By Sri.D.Devaraj, Adv.,)
V/s
1. The Managing Director, .....RESPONDENT IN
Karnataka State Road Transport M.V.C.No.3459/2014
Corporation,
Head Office,
K.H.Road,
Shanthinagar,
Bangalore-560 027.
(Registered owner of the Bus bearing
No.KA-01-F-9340)
(R-1 By Sri. Mahadevaiah, Adv.,)
COMMON JUDGMENT
As per the Order dated 08.01.2015 passed on memo in
M.V.C.No.6078/2013, M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and
M.V.C.No.3459/2014 are clubbed with M.V.C.No.6078/2013 and
the common evidence and trial is conducted in
M.V.C.No.6078/2013 and hence, M.V.C.No.6078/2013,
M.V.C.No.6127/2013, M.V.C.No.3459/2014 are pending for
consideration and disposal by passing a common judgment.
2. It is pertinent to note here that, initially, the
Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 had filed the said petition as
against the Respondents No.1 and 2 and later, as per the Order
dated 24.06.2014 passed on memo filed by the Learned Counsel
appearing for the Petitioner, the name of the Respondent No.1 is
deleted from the cause title of the petition. Hence, now the
petition filed by the Petitioner as against the Respondent No.2 is
SCCH-7 5 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
only pending for consideration and disposal in
M.V.C.No.No.6078/2013.
3. The Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 has filed the
said petition as against the Respondent No.2 under Section 166
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, praying to award compensation
of Rupees 85,00,000/- with interest and costs.
4. The brief averments of the Petitioner's case in M.V.C.
No.6078/2013 are as follows;
a) On 15.09.2013, one Sri.Venkata Rao and his wife
Smt. Prameela for the purpose of distributing Wedding Invitation
Cards of their son Sri Narahari to the friends and relatives, the
said Sri. Venkata Rao and Smt.Prameela went to Mysore along
with him, who is driving the Mistubishi Lancer Car bearing
Registration No.KA-22-M-6353. When they were on their way to
Mysore, near Toobinakere Industrial Area, ahead of Prerana
Motors, at about 11.15 a.m., when the Mistubishi Lancer Car
bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353 was going on the left side
of the road on Bangalore-Mysore Road towards Mysore, the
KSRTC Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-F-9340
coming from Mysore towards Bangalore in an extreme speed with
rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the Bus,
the Bus ran over the divider of the road and dashed in front of
the Mistubishi Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-
6353 and also dashed with another Motor Cycle bearing
Registration No.KA-11-W-3311.
SCCH-7 6 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
b) He sustained grievous injuries and the said Sri.
Venkata Rao died on the spot due to the injuries sustained in the
said accident and Smt. Prameela sustained severe injuries on the
spot and taken to Mandya District Hospital. Due to the grievous
injuries sustained by Smt. Prameela, died in the Hospital at
about 12.15 p.m., and Postmortems were conducted at Mandya
District Hospital.
c) Due to the said accident, he had sustained grievous
injuries all over his body and he was immediately shifted to
Hospital at Mandya for immediate treatment. Thereafter, he was
shifted to B.G.S. Global Hospital, Bangalore, for further
treatment and during the said treatment, he was diagnosed and
assessed that, he was sustained grievous injuries, like, Grade IV
Splenic injury, left renal injury grade II, right patellar tendon
avulsion, left knee medial patello femoralter and small avulsion
fracture medial tibial condyl. He was admitted to B.G.S. Global
Hospital as an inpatient on 15.09.2013 and discharged on
27.09.2013. During the admission in B.G.S. Global Hospital, he
was undergone surgery on 17.09.2013 for wound debridement
and patella tendon repair of right knee and wound debridement
and MPFL repair of left knee under GA on 17.09.2013. He was
kept in ICU and managed conservatively with serial Hb% and
vitals monitoring as he was hemodynamically stable. He was
advised full weight bearing with help of walker.
d) He has incurred more than Rupees 2,50,000/-
towards the medical treatment and also Rupees 50,000/-
SCCH-7 7 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
towards the transportation and nourishment. He has advised to
take further treatment, which costs more than Rupees 50,000/-.
e) Before the accident, he was working as a Stunt man
in film industry under Card No.1432/131 issued by the All
Karnataka Stunt Director's and Stunt Artists' Association (Regd.).
From the said job, he was getting income of Rupees 50,000/- to
Rupees 60,000/- per month. Due to the said accident, he had
lost his bright future and he cannot able to perform his stunt
actions in future and the said accident spoiled his entire life and
in future at any point of time, he cannot regain his original
condition as earlier to the said accident.
f) Due to the said injury, he is living with walker only,
which caused him a great difficulty and he was put to very
critical condition and his routine work regularly and the said
accident caused heavy loss to him as he could not able to do his
work for his livelihood in future and as such, he has lost his
entire future life and he became dependent on other. He is the
only earning member of his family and before the accident, he
was looking after his father and mother, who is aged about 60
years and 50 years respectively along with his younger brother.
Due to the said accident, his entire family was put to great
hardship and irreparable loss and they became dependent on
others for their livelihood, as such, he was only the bread earner
in the family. Due to the said injuries, he became totally disabled
to attend his routine work in future. Due to the accident, he is
permanently disabled and suffered heavy loss and he is still
under treatment for the injuries sustained in the said accident.
SCCH-7 8 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
In the circumstances, he has been put to total loss in his future
life by developing permanent disablement with intolerable pains
day and night.
g) He claims Rupees 85,00,000/- under the head of
general damages including permanent disturbance in his future
life, total loss of income in his future life, permanent
disablement, loss of life, loss of amenities and nourishments. He
could not regain his original condition at any time in future after
the said accident inspite of best and continuous treatment taken
by him.
h) The accident took place within the jurisdiction of
Mandya Rural Police Station and registered a case in Crime
No.438/2013 as against the driver of the KSRTC Vaibhav Bus
bearing Registration No.KA-01-9340.
i) The Respondent No.2 has failed to settle the claim to
his family till date. He is permanent resident of Bangalore City
and had chosen to prefer the said claim petition before this
Hon'ble Court. He is not at all filed any similar petition before
any other Court of Law and he has not claimed compensation
under Section 140 before any Authority. Hence this petition.
5. It is pertinent to note here that, as per the Order
dated 24.06.2014 passed on memo filed by the Learned Counsel
appearing for the Petitioner, the name of the Respondent No.1 is
deleted from the cause title of the petition.
SCCH-7 9 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
6. Initially, though the notice was duly served on the
Respondent No.2, he was remained absent and hence, he was
placed as exparte on 01.01.2014. Later, the Respondent No.2 has
appeared before this Tribunal through his Learned Counsel and
as per the Order dated 07.03.2014 passed on I.A.No.I, the
exparte Order is set-aside and the Respondent No.2 is taken on
file. The Respondent No.2 has filed the written statement.
7. The Respondent No.2 inter-alia denying the entire
case of the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013, has further
contended as follows;
a) The petition is not maintainable either in law or on
facts.
b) The amount of Rupees 35,00,000/- with interest
claimed as compensation is baseless, speculative, imaginary and
exorbitant besides being not due by him. He is not liable to pay
any compensation to the Petitioner.
c) The amount of Rupees 35,00,000/- claimed as a
compensation under various heads is not sustainable in law. He
is not liable to pay any compensation to the Petitioner.
d) On 15.09.2013, the KSRTC Bus bearing Registration
No.KA-01-F-9340 was proceeding from Mysore to Bangalore via
Mandya, driven by its driver slowly, carefully on the left side of
the road observing all the traffic rules and regulations and when
the said KSRTC Bus reached near Toobinakere Industrial Area in
SCCH-7 10 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
a down gradient road, one Car was coming from Industrial Area,
suddenly took turn in front of the said Bus. Immediately, the
driver of the said Bus took turn to left side of the road for
avoiding the accident, at the same time, two wheeler was going
on the left side of the road for the purpose of avoiding the
accident, control the speed to low speed while doing so the
engine of the Bus got switched off and steering got locked and
the said Bus ran over the road divider and then, applied the
break and stationed the Bus, at the same time, one Mitsubishi
Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353 driven by its
driver with rash and negligent manner, without following traffic
rules and regulations with high speed, came from Bangalore side
and dashed against the said K.S.R.T.C. Bus. This accident is due
to above mechanical defects. At least the Driver of the said Car
may avoid the accident by applying the break by keeping the
distance. In that accident, two persons died and one person
injured. This accident was occurred purely on the part of the
rash and negligent manner of the driving of the driver of the said
Car. The Petitioner colluded with the jurisdictional Police
Authority, filed a false criminal case as against the Driver of the
said K.S.R.T.C. Bus and hence, he is not liable to pay any
compensation to the Petitioner. Further, the petition is bad for
non- joinder of necessary parties, namely, owner and Insurance
Company of Mitsubishi Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-
6356, on this ground also, the petition become infructuous.
e) He may be permitted to file any other counter in any
other changed circumstances.
SCCH-7 11 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
f) In all the above facts and circumstances, the
Petitioner is not entitled to any relief/s and the claim of the
Petitioner is not sustainable in law and hence, the claim petition
is liable to be dismissed as against him. Hence, prayed to dismiss
the claim petition with costs.
8. It is pertinent to note here that, initially, the
Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 had filed the said petition as
against the Respondents No.1 and 2 and later, as per the Order
dated 24.06.2014 passed on memo filed by the Learned Counsel
appearing for the Petitioners, the name of the Respondent No.1 is
deleted from the cause title of the petition. Hence, now the
petition filed by the Petitioners as against the Respondent No.2 is
only pending for consideration and disposal in
M.V.C.No.No.6127/2013.
9. The Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 has filed the
said petition as against the Respondent No.2 under Section 166
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, praying to award compensation
of Rupees 30,00,000/- with interest and costs.
10. The brief averments of the Petitioners' case in M.V.C.
No.6127/2013 are as follows;
a) They are the sons of the deceased Sri.Venkata Rao
and Smt.Prameela. For the purpose of distributing the Wedding
Invitation Cards to the friends and relatives, their parents,
namely, Sri.Venkata Rao and Smt.Prameela went to Mysore along
with one Sri.Gangaraju, who was driving the Mistubishi Lancer
SCCH-7 12 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353. When their parents
and one Sri.Gangaraju on their way to Mysore, near Toobinakere
Industrial Area, ahead of Prerana Motors, at about 11.15 A.M.,
when the Mistubishi Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-
M-6353 was going on the left side of the road on Bangalore-
Mysore Road towards Mysore, the KSRTC Vaibhav Bus bearing
Registration No.KA-01-F-9340 coming from Mysore towards
Bangalore in an extreme speed with rash and negligent driving
on the part of the driver of the Bus, the Bus ran over the divider
of the road and dashed in front of the Mistubishi Lancer Car
bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353 and also dashed with
another Motor Cycle bearing Registration No.KA-11-W-3311.
Their father Sri.Venkatak Rao died on the spot due to the injuries
sustained in the said accident and their mother Smt.Prameela
sustained severe injuries and taken to Mandya District Hospital.
But, due to the grievous injuries sustained by their mother, their
mother died in the Hospital at about 12.15 P.M. and
postmortems were conducted at Mandya District Hospital.
b) Their father was the sole bread earning member in
their family and due to the said accident, they have lost their
lone earning member of their family and they have exposed to
great hardship and injury and the said accident caused heavy
loss to them, as such, they have lost their parental love at their
tender age. They have become lonely now and they have put to
great hardship and injury due to untimely death of their parents.
Due to the said accident, the marriage of the Petitioner No.1 was
SCCH-7 13 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
cancelled and they have put to mental agony, torture and
hardship.
c) They have spent Rupees 75,000/- towards
transportation and funeral expenses of their parents and also for
other ceremonies. They are claiming a total compensation of
Rupees 30,00,000/- due to loss of dependency, loss of
expectancy, loss of consortium and funeral expenses, loss of
parental love and affections, pain and sufferings and also for loss
of company and protection to them.
d) The accident took place within the jurisdiction of
Mandya Rural Police Station and registered a case in Crime
No.438/2013 as against the driver of the KSRTC Vaibhav Bus
bearing Registration KA-01-9340. The Respondent No.2 has
failed to settle the claim to the family of the deceased till date.
e) They are residing at C/o B.Veerappa, No.19/2, 3rd
Cross, Karnashree Layout, Medahalli, K.R.Puram, Bangalore-36
and they have chosen to prefer the present claim petition before
this Hon'ble Court. They have not at all filed any similar petition
before any other Court of Law and they have not claimed any
compensation under Section 140 before any Authority. Hence
this petition.
11. It is pertinent to note here that, as per the Order
dated 24.06.2014 passed on memo filed by the Learned Counsel
appearing for the Petitioner, the name of the Respondent No.1 is
deleted from the cause title of the petition.
SCCH-7 14 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
12. Initially, though the notice was duly served on the
Respondent No.2, he was remained absent and hence, he was
placed as exparte on 07.01.2014. Later, the Respondent No.2 has
appeared before this Tribunal through his Learned Counsel and
as per the Order dated 15.04.2014 passed on I.A.No.I, the
exparte Order is set-aside and the Respondent No.2 is taken on
file. The Respondent No.2 has filed the written statement.
13. The Respondent No.2 inter-alia denying the entire
case of the Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013, has further
contended as follows;
a) The petition is not maintainable either in law or on
facts. Further the Petitioners have filed the present claim petition
for two deceased, their names, Venkata Rao.Y.N. and
Smt.Prameela, is not maintainable and the Petitioners failure to
file two petitions.
b) The amount of Rupees 55,00,000/- with interest
claimed as total compensation for two deceased is baseless,
speculative, imaginary and exorbitant besides being not due by
him. He is not liable to pay any compensation to the Petitioners.
c) The amount of Rupees 55,00,000/- for two deceased
claimed as a compensation under various heads is not
sustainable in law. He is not liable to pay any compensation to
the Petitioners.
SCCH-7 15 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
d) On 15.09.2013 the KSRTC Bus bearing Registration
No.KA-01-F-9340 was proceeding from Mysore to Bangalore via
Mandya, driven by its driver slowly, carefully on the left side of
the road observing all the traffic rules and regulations. When the
said KSRTC Bus reached near Toobinakere Industrial Area in a
down gradient road, one Car was coming from Industrial Area,
suddenly took turn in front of the said Bus. Immediately, the
driver of the said Bus took turn to left side of the road for
avoiding the accident, at the same time, two wheeler was going
on the left side of the road, for the purpose of avoiding the
accident, control the speed to low speed, while doing so, the
engine of the Bus got switched off and steering got locked and
the said Bus ran over the road divider and then, applied the
break and stationed the Bus at the same time one Mitsubishi
Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353 driven by its
driver with rash and negligent manner, without following traffic
rules and regulations with high speed, came from Bangalore side
and dashed as against the said K.S.R.T.C. Bus. This accident is
due to said mechanical defects. At least the Driver of the said Car
may avoid the accident by applying the break by keeping the
distance. In that accident, two persons died and one person
injured. This accident was occurred purely on the part of the
rash and negligent manner of the driver of the said Car. The
Petitioners colluded with the jurisdictional Police Authority filed a
false criminal case as against the Driver of the said K.S.R.T.C.
Bus and hence, he is not liable to pay any compensation to the
Petitioners. Further, the petition is bad for non joinder of
necessary parties, namely, owner and Insurance Company of the
SCCH-7 16 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
Mitsubishi Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6356. On this
ground also, the petition become infructuous.
e) He may be permitted to file any other counter in any
other changed circumstances.
f) In all the above facts and circumstances, the
Petitioners are not entitled to any relief/s and the claim of the
Petitioners is not sustainable in law and hence, the claim petition
is liable to be dismissed as against him. He has paid Rupees
15,000/- towards each death of the claimants as interim relief on
humanitarian grounds and may be deducted from the
compensation, if any, awarded. Hence, prayed to dismiss the
claim petition with costs.
14. The Petitioners in M.V.C.No.3459/2014 have filed
the said petition as against the Respondent under Section
166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, praying to award
compensation of Rupees 25,00,000/- with interest and costs.
15. The brief averments of the Petitioners' case in M.V.C.
No.3459/2014 are as follows;
a) They are the children of deceased Sri.Venkata Rao
and Smt.Prameela. For the purpose of distributing the Wedding
Invitation Cards to the friends and relatives, their parents,
namely, Sri.Venkata Rao and Smt.Prameela went to Mysore along
with one Sri.Gangaraju, who was driving the Mistubishi Lancer
Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353. When their parents
SCCH-7 17 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
and one Sri.Gangaraju on their way to Mysore, near Toobinakere
Industrial Area, ahead of Prerana Motors, at about 11.15 A.M.
when the Mistubishi Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-
M-6353 was going on the left side of the road on Bangalore-
Mysore Road towards Mysore, the KSRTC Vaibhav Bus bearing
Registration No.KA-01-F-9340 coming from Mysore towards
Bangalore in an extreme speed with rash and negligent driving
on the part of the driver of the Bus and the Bus ran over the
divider of the road and dashed in front of the Mistubishi Lancer
Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353 and also dashed with
another Motor Cycle bearing Registration No.KA-11-W-3311.
Their father Sri.Venkatak Rao died on the spot due to the injuries
sustained in the said accident and their mother Smt.Prameela
sustained severe injuries and taken to Mandya District Hospital.
But, due to the grievous injuries sustained by their mother, their
mother died in the Hospital at about 12.15 P.M. and
postmortems were conducted at Mandya District Hospital.
b) Their mother was also a earning members in her
family and due to the said accident, they have lost their earning
member of the family and they have exposed to great hardship
and injury and the said accident caused heavy loss to them, as
such, they have lost their motherly love at their tender age. They
have become lonely now and they have put to great hardship and
injury due to untimely death of their mother.
c) Due to the said accident, the marriage of the
Petitioner No.1 was cancelled and they have put to mental agony,
torture and hardship. They have spent Rupees 65,000/- towards
SCCH-7 18 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
medical expenses and Rupees 50,000/- transportation and
funeral expenses of their mother and also for other ceremonies.
They are claiming a total compensation of Rupees 25,00,000/-
due to loss of dependency, loss of expectancy, loss of consortium
and funeral expenses, loss of parental love and affections, pain
and sufferings and also for loss of company and protection to
them.
d) The accident took place within the jurisdiction of
Mandya Rural Police Station and registered a case in Crime
No.438/2013 as against the driver of the KSRTC Vaibhav Bus
bearing Registration KA-01-9340.
e) The Respondent No.2 has failed to settle the claim to
the family of the deceased till date.
f) They are residing at C/o B.Veerappa, No.19/2, 3rd
Cross, Karnashree Layout, Medahalli, K.R.Puram, Bangalore-36
and they have chosen to prefer the present claim petition before
this Hon'ble Court. They have not at all filed any similar petition
before any other Court of Law and they have not claimed any
compensation under Section 140 before any Authority. Hence,
this petition.
16. Initially, though the notice was duly served on the
Respondent, he was remained absent and hence, he was placed
as exparte on 30.10.2014. Later, the Respondent has appeared
before this Tribunal through his Learned Counsel and as per the
Order dated 08.01.2015 passed on I.A.No.I, the exparte Order is
SCCH-7 19 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
set-aside and the Respondent is taken on file. The Respondent
has filed the written statement.
17. The Respondent inter-alia denying the entire case of
the Petitioners in M.V.C.No.3459/2014, has further contended as
follows;
a) The petition is not maintainable either in law or on
facts.
b) The amount of Rupees 25,00,000/- with interest
claimed as total compensation is baseless, speculative, imaginary
and exorbitant besides being not due by him. He is not liable to
pay any compensation to the Petitioners.
c) The amount of Rupees 25,00,000/- claimed as a
compensation under various heads is not sustainable in law. He
is not liable to pay any compensation to the Petitioners.
d) On 15.09.2013, the KSRTC Bus bearing Registration
No.KA-01-F-9340 was proceeding from Mysore to Bangalore via
Mandya, driven by its driver slowly, carefully on the left side of
the road observing all the traffic rules and regulations. When the
said KSRTC Bus reached near Toobinakere Industrial Area in a
down gradient road, one Car was coming from Industrial Area,
suddenly took turn in front of the said Bus. Immediately, the
driver of the said Bus took turn to left side of the road for
avoiding the accident, at the same time, two wheeler was going
on the left side of the road, for the purpose of avoiding the
SCCH-7 20 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
accident, control the speed to low speed, while doing so, the
engine of the Bus switched off and steering got locked and the
said Bus ran over the road divider and then, applied the break
and stationed the Bus, at the same time, one Mitsubishi Lancer
Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353 driven by its driver
with rash and negligent manner, without following traffic rules
and regulations with high speed, came from Bangalore side and
dashed against the said K.S.R.T.C. Bus. This accident is due to
said mechanical defects. At least, the Driver of the said Car may
avoid the accident by applying the break by keeping the distance.
In that accident, two persons died and one person injured. This
accident was occurred purely on the part of the rash and
negligent manner of the driver of the said Car. The Petitioners
colluded with the jurisdictional Police Authority, filed a false
criminal case as against the Driver of the said K.S.R.T.C. Bus
and hence, he is not liable to pay any compensation to the
Petitioners. Further, the petition is bad for non joinder of
necessary parties, namely, owner and Insurance Company of the
Mitsubishi Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6356. On this
ground also, the petition become in fructuous.
e) He may be permitted to file any other counter in any
other changed circumstances.
f) In all the above facts and circumstances, the
Petitioners are not entitled to any relief/s and the claim of the
Petitioners is not sustainable in law. He has paid Rupees
15,000/- towards each death to the claimants as interim relief on
humanitarian ground. This amount may be deducted from the
SCCH-7 21 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
compensation, if any, awarded. Hence, prayed to dismiss the
claim petition with costs.
18. Based on the above said pleadings, my Learned
Predecessor-in-Office has framed the following Issues;
ISSUES
In M.V.C.No.6078/2013
1. Whether the Petitioners proves that he met
with an RTA that occurred on 15.09.2013
at about 11.15 a.m., Bangalore Mysore
Road, near Tubenakere Industrial Area and
the Petitioner sustained injuries due to
rash and negligent driving of KSRTC Bus
bearing No.KA-01-F-9340?
2. Whether the Petitioner is entitled to
compensation? If so, how much and from
whom?
3. What Order?
In M.V.C.No.6127/2013
1. Whether the Petitioners prove that, Sri.
Y.N. Venkata Rao succumbed in a Road
Traffic Accident that occurred on
15.09.2013, at about 11.45 a.m.,
Bangalore Mysore Road, Near Tubenakere
Industrial Area, which was due to rash
and negligent driving of KSRTC Bus
bearing regn.No.KA-01-F-9340?
2. Whether the Petitioners are entitled for
compensation? If so, how much and from
whom?
SCCH-7 22 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
3. What Order?
In M.V.C.No.3459/2014
1. Whether the Petitioners prove that Smt.
Pramila Rao succumbed in a Road Traffic
Accident that occurred on 15.09.2013, at
about 11.45 a.m., Bangalore Mysore Road,
Near Tubenakere, Industrial Area which
was due to rash and negligent driving of
KSRTC bus bearing regn.No.KA-01-F-
9340?
2. Whether the Petitioners are entitled for
compensation? If so, how much and from
whom?
3. What Order?
19. In order to prove their case, the Petitioner in M.V.C.
No.6078/2013 himself has been examined as P.W.1 and has also
examined two witnesses as P.W.3 and P.W.4 by filing the
affidavits as their examination-in-chief and has placed reliance
upon Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.12, Ex.P.18 to Ex.P.23 and Ex.P.24(a) and
the Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and
M.V.C.No.3459/2014 have examined the Petitioner No.1 in both
the petitions as P.W.2 by filing an affidavit as his examination-in-
chief and have placed reliance upon Ex.P.13 to Ex.P.17 and
Ex.P.24 to Ex.P.31. On the other hand, the Respondent No.2 in
M.V.C.No.6078/2013 and M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and the
Respondent in M.V.C.No.3459/2014 has examined his driver as
R.W.1 by filing an affidavit as his examination-in-chief and no
documents got marked on his behalf. Ex.P.32 Charge Sheet is
SCCH-7 23 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
marked on behalf of all the Petitioners with consent. It is
pertinent to note here that, Ex.P.24 is marked twice in respect of
different documents. Hence, to avoid the confliction, Ex.P.24 MRI
Scan 3 in numbers, which is marked on 24.07.2015 through
P.W.1, is considered as Ex.P.24(a), in the following discussion.
20. Heard the arguments. The Learned Counsel appearing
for the Petitioners in all the cases has filed the written
arguments.
21. My answers to the above said Issues are as follows;
In M.V.C.No.6078/2013
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative,
Issue No.2 : Partly in the Affirmative,
The Petitioner is
entitled for compensation of
Rupees 6,76,630/- with
interest at the rate of 6%
p.a. (excluding future
medical expenses of Rupees
25,000/-) from the date of
the petition till the date of
payment, from the
Respondent No.2.
Issue No.3 : As per the final Order,
In M.V.C.No.6127/2013
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative,
Issue No.2 : Partly in the Affirmative,
SCCH-7 24 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
The Petitioners are
entitled for compensation
of Rupees 80,000/- with
interest at the rate of 6%
p.a. from the date of the
petition till the date of
payment, from the
Respondent No.2.
Issue No.3 : As per the final Order,
In M.V.C.No.3459/2014
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative,
Issue No.2 : Partly in the Affirmative,
The Petitioners are
entitled for compensation of
Rupees 80,000/- with
interest at the rate of 6%
p.a. from the date of the
petition till the date of
payment, from the
Respondent.
Issue No.3 : As per the final Order,
for the following,
REASONS
22. ISSUE NO.1 IN ALL THE CASES :- The P.W.1, who
is the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 has stated in his
examination-in-chief that, on 15.09.2013, one Sri.Venkata Rao
and his wife Smt. Prameela for the purpose of distributing
Wedding Invitation Cards of their son Sri Narahari, i.e., the
Petitioner No.1 in both M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and
SCCH-7 25 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
M.V.C.No.3459/2014, to the friends and relatives, the said Sri.
Venkata Rao and Smt.Prameela went to Mysore along with him
and he was driving the Mistubishi Lancer Car bearing
Registration No.KA-22-M-6353 and when they were on their way
to Mysore, near Toobinakere Industrial Area, ahead of Prerana
Motors, at about 11.15 a.m., when the Mistubishi Lancer Car
bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353 was going on the left side
of the road on Bangalore-Mysore Road towards Mysore, the
K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-F-9340
came from Mysore towards Bangalore in an extreme speed with
rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the Bus
and at that time, the Bus ran over the divider of the road and
dashed in front of the Mistubishi Lancer Car bearing Registration
No.KA-22-M-6353 and also dashed with another Motor Cycle
bearing Registration No.KA-11-W-3311. He has further stated
that, due to the said impact, he has sustained grievous injuries
and the said Sri. Venkata Rao died on the spot due to the
injuries sustained in the said accident and Smt. Prameela
sustained severe injuries on the spot and taken to Mandya
District Hospital and due to the grievous injuries sustained by
Smt. Prameela, she died in the Hospital at about 12.15 p.m., and
Postmortems were conducted at Mandya District Hospital. He
has further stated that, due to the said accident, he had
sustained grievous injuries all over his body and he was
immediately shifted to Hospital at Mandya for immediate
treatment and thereafter, he was shifted to B.G.S. Global
Hospital, Bangalore for further treatment and during the said
treatment, he was diagnosed and assessed that, he was
SCCH-7 26 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
sustained grievous injuries like Grade IV Splenic injury, left renal
injury grade II, right patellar tendon avulsion, left knee medial
patello femoralter and small avulsion fracture medial tibial
condyle. He has further stated that, he was admitted to B.G.S.
Global Hospital as an inpatient on 15.09.2013 and discharged on
27.09.2013. He has further stated that, the accident took place
within the jurisdiction of Mandya Rural Police Station and
registered a case in Crime No.438/2013 as against the driver of
the K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-F-
9340.
23. The P.W.2, who is the Petitioner No.1 in both
M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and M.V.C.No.3459/2014, has also stated
the same evidence of P.W.1 in his examination-in-chief. He has
further stated that, due to the said accident, their father Sri.
Venkata Rao died on the spot due to the injuries sustained in the
said accident and their mother Smt. Prameela sustained severe
injuries on the spot and taken to Mandya District Hospital and
due to the grievous injuries sustained by Smt. Prameela, she died
in the Hospital at about 12.15 p.m., and Postmortems were
conducted at Mandya District Hospital. He has further stated
that, the driver of the Mistubishi Lancer Car bearing Registration
No.KA-22-M-6353 has also sustained grievous injuries in the
said accident and taken treatment at various Hospitals.
24. No doubt, the P.W.1, who is the Petitioner No.1 in
both M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and M.V.C.No.3459/2014, is not an
eye witness of the said accident. In this regard, the P.W.2 has
stated in his cross-examination that, he has not witnessed the
SCCH-7 27 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
accident. Further, the Respondent in all the cases has examined
the driver of the offending K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing
Registration No.KA-01-F-9340 as R.W.1, who has stated in his
examination-in-chief that, on 15.09.2013, he was driving the
K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-F-9340,
which was proceeding from Mysore to Banglaore via Mandya,
slowly carefully on the left side of the road, observing all the
traffic rules and regulations and when their Bus reached near
Toobinakere Industrial Area in a upgradiant road, one Car was
coming from industrial area, suddenly took turn in front of their
Bus and immediately, he took turn the Bus to left side of the
road for avoiding the accident, at the same time, two wheeler was
going on the left side of the road and for the purpose of avoiding
the accident, control the speed to low speed, while doing so, the
light of the Bus switched off and steering got locked, due to this
impact, their Bus ran over the divider and then, applied the
break and stationed his Bus, at the same time, one Mistsubisi
Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353 driven by its
driver with rash and negligent manner, without following the
traffic rules and regulations with high speed came from
Bangalore side and dashed against his stationed Bus due to
mechanical defects. He has further stated that, at least the driver
of the said Car may avoid the accident by applying the break by
keeping the distance. He has further stated that, this accident
was occurred purely on the part of rash and negligent manner of
driving of the driver of the said Car and he was not at all
responsible for the accident and the Petitioner collude with the
SCCH-7 28 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
jurisdictional Police Authority, filed a false criminal case as
against him.
25. But, based on the said evidence of R.W.1, it cannot be
believed and accept the defence taken by the Respondent that,
there was no negligence on the part of the R.W.1 in driving the
offending K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-
F-9340, but, the entire negligence is on the part of the Petitioner
in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 in driving the Mistsubishi Lancer Car
bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353, as, to consider his case,
the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 has produced Ex.P.1 FIR,
Ex.P.2 Statement, Ex.P.3 Crime Details Form, Ex.P.4 Sketch,
Ex.P.5 IMV Report, Ex.P.6 Wound Certificate, Ex.P.7 Discharge
Summary, Ex.P.24 MRI Scan and the Petitioners in
M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and M.V.C.No.3459/2014 have produced
Ex.P.13 and Ex.P.14 Inquest Mahazars, Ex.P.15 and Ex.P.16
Postmortem Reports, Ex.P.25 Death Certificate relating to
Venkatarao.Y.N. and Ex.P.26 Death Certificate relating to
Pramila and Ex.P.32 Charge Sheet and Petitioner in
M.V.C.No.6078/2013 has also examined the treated Doctor as
P.W.3, who has produced Ex.P.18 Admission Records, Ex.P.19
OPD records and Ex.P.20 X-ray Film, which clearly disclosed
that, due to very high speed, rash and negligent manner of
driving of the offending K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing
Registration No.KA-01-F-9340 by its driver itself, i.e., R.W.1, the
said road traffic accident was taken place on 15.09.2013 at 11.15
a.m., on Bangalore - Mysore Road, which dashed to the
Mitsubishi Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353,
SCCH-7 29 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
which was driven by the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013,
wherein, the parents of the Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013
and M.V.C.No.3459/2014, namely, Sri. Venkatarao and Smt.
Prameela, were traveling, and due to the said impact, Sri.
Venkatarao died on the accidental spot itself and due to the
accidental injuries, Smt.Prameela had also sustained grievous
injuries and she died in the Hospital at 12.15 p.m., during the
course of treatment and the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013
had sustained 6 grievous injuries and by admitting as an
inpatient from 15.09.2013 to 27.09.2013, i.e., for 13 days, he
took treatment to the said accidental injuries at B.G.S. Global
Hospital, which is clear from the following discussion.
Furthermore, the P.W.1 in his cross-examination has clearly
stated that, after the accident, he was taken to the Government
Hospital, Mandya and later, he was shifted to B.G.S. Hospital.
Further, the R.W.1 in his cross-examination has clearly admitted
that, Mysore - Bangalore Road is a two ways road and on
15.09.2013, he was proceeding from Mysore to Bangalore and he
does not know the registration number of the Car, which has
been stated by him in his examination-in-chief. He has further
clearly stated that, steering of the Bus was jammed and its lights
were off at the time of accident. He has further clearly stated
that, the Car was proceeding from Bangalore to Mysore. He has
further clearly stated that, the Police have registered a criminal
case as against him. From the said evidence of R.W.1, it clearly
goes to show that, the entire negligence is on his part in the
commission of the said road traffic accident. Furthermore,
though the P.W.1 and P.W.2 have been cross-examined by the
SCCH-7 30 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
Respondent, nothing has been elicited from their mouth about
his defence.
26. The contents of Ex.P.1 FIR, Ex.P.2 Statement and
Ex.P.3 Crime Details Form clearly disclosed that, the eye witness
of the said accident had lodged Ex.P.2 Statement before the
Mandya Rural Police as against the driver of the offending
K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-F-9340
by alleging that, on 15.09.2013 at 11.15 a.m., when he was
proceeding on Bangalore - Mysore Road, to go to Elechanahalli
Village, near Prerana Motors Thubinakere Industrial Area, at that
time, the Bus driver came with high speed, rash and negligent
manner from Mysore towards Bangalore and ran over the road
divider and came to Bangalore to Mysore Road and dashed as
against his Motor Cycle and Car and three persons were traveling
in the said Car had sustained injuries and out of them one male
person died on the accidental spot itself and one female had
sustained grievous injuries and he was shifted to Mandya
Government Hospital and the registration number of the
Mitsubishi Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353
and its front portion was entirely damaged and offending Bus
was on the accidental spot itself and its number K.S.R.T.C.
Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-F-9340 and its front
portion was also damaged and the front head light, mud guard of
his Motor Cycle are damaged and on enquiry, it is found that, the
name of the deceased is Venkatarao and the female, who was
shifted to the Hospital is also died, whose name is Prameela and
the injured, who was driving the said Car is Gangaraju and in
SCCH-7 31 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
the said accident, he has not sustained any injuries and due to
the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending Bus, the
said accident was taken place and the driver of the offending Bus
fled away from the accidental spot and as such, he prayed to take
necessary legal action as against the driver of the offending
K.S.R.T.C. Bus and based on Ex.P.2 Statement, the said Police
have resisted a criminal case as against the driver of the
offending Bus for the offences punishable under Sections 279,
337 and 304(A) of IPC R/w Section 187 of IMV Act. On perusal of
the contents of Ex.P.1 FIR, Ex.P.2 Statement and Ex.P.3 Crime
details Form, it is further clearly disclosed that, there is no delay
as such, in lodging the statement by the eye witness in respect of
the said road traffic accident.
27. The contents of Ex.P.4 Sketch and Ex.P.5 MVI Report
clearly disclosed that, the entire negligence is on the part of the
driver of the offending K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing
Registration No.KA-01-F-9340, which dashed to the Mitsubishi
Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353, which was
proceeding on the left side of the road and also another Motor
Cycle bearing Registration No.KA-11-W-3311, wherein, the
complainant was proceeding and there was no negligence on the
part of the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 in driving the said
Mitsubishi Lancer Car and also the Complainant. The damages
caused to all the vehicles were clearly shown in Ex.P.5 MVI
Report, which disclosed about the terrific impact of the said road
traffic accident. It is also clearly mentioned in Ex.P.5 MVI Report
SCCH-7 32 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
that, the said accident was not occurred due to any mechanical
defects of said vehicles.
28. The contents of Ex.P.6 Wound Certificate clearly
disclosed that, the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 was
admitted in B.G.S. Global Hospital accompanied by Jayaraj
reports certain injuries said to have been caused on 15.09.2013
due to road traffic accident and on examination at 8.00 p.m., on
15.09.2013 itself, it is found that, Grade IV Splenic injury, left
renal injury grade II, right patellar tendon avulsion, left knee
medial patello femoralter and small avulsion fracture medial
tibial condyle, i.e., 6 grievous injuries and by admitting as an
inpatient from 15.09.2013 to 27.09.2013, i.e., for 13 days, he
took treatment to the said accidental injuries in the said
Hospital.
29. The contents of Ex.P.7 Discharge Summary and
Ex.P.24(a) MRI Scan 2 in numbers, Ex.P.18 Admission Records
and Ex.P.20 X-ray Film further clearly disclosed that, in the said
road traffic accident, the Petitioner had sustained Grade IV
Splenic injury, Mild traumatic pancreatitis (Grade I pancreatic
injury) left renal injury grade II, right patellar tendon avulsion,
left knee medial patello femoralter and small avulsion fracture
medial tibial condyle, which found on diagnosed and he was
initially treated in local Hospital in Mandya and referred for
further management with alleged history of road traffic accident
on 15.09.2013 at 11.30 a.m., in Mandya - Mysore Highway near
Mandya, he was admitted in the said Hospital to take treatment
to the said accidental injuries from 15.09.2013 to 27.09.2013,
SCCH-7 33 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
i.e., for 13 days, he took treatment to the said accidental injuries
in B.G.S. Global Hospital.
30. Ex.P.13 and Ex.P.14 Inquest Mahazar and Ex.P.15
and Ex.P.16 Postmortem Reports further clearly disclosed that,
the father of the Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and
M.V.C.No. 3459/2014, namely, Sri. Venkatarao, died on the
accidental spot itself due to severe grievous injuries and their
mother Smt. Prameela died during the course of treatment at
12.15 p.m., on the same day of accident in the Hospital due to
severe grievous injuries sustained in the said road traffic
accident. It is clearly mentioned in Ex.P.15 and Ex.P.16
Postmortem Reports that, the death of the parents of the
Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and 3459/2014 is due to
shock and hemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries sustained.
From this, it is made crystal clear that, the parents of the
Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and 3459/2014 died due to
the accidental injuries, which caused them in the road traffic
accident, which was taken place on 15.09.2013 at 11.45 a.m.,
31. It is clear from the contents of Ex.P.32 Charge Sheet
that, since during the course of investigation, it is found that, the
Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 was driving the Mitsubishi
Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353 along with
Venkatarao and his wife Prameela from Bangalore to Mysore and
near Prerana Motors, Thubinakere Industrial Area, at that time,
the complainant was proceeding on his Motor Cycle bearing
Registration No.KA-11-W-3311 in front of the said Car from
Mandya towards Thubinakere, at that time, the offending
SCCH-7 34 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-F-9340
came with very high speed, rash and negligent manner
endangering to human life by its driver without control and ran
over the road divider on Bangalore - Mysore Road and dashed to
the said Mitsubishi Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-
6353 on head on collusion and also dashed to the Motor Cycle
bearing Registration No.KA-11-W-3311 and due to the said
impact, Venkatarao had sustained grievous injuries on his
forehead, cheek, left hand, both knees, right chest and head and
all over the body and he died on the accidental spot itself and his
wife Prameela had sustained grievous injuries on her hands, legs
and all over the body and she succumbed to the injuries at 12.15
p.m., in Mandya District Hospital during the course of treatment
and the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 had sustained
grievous injuries on his stomach, legs and has also fracture
injuries, which are grievous in nature and Motor Cycle, Car and
offending K.S.R.T.C. Bus are damaged in the said road traffic
accident and the driver of the offending K.S.R.T.C. Bus had not
given treatment to the injured and did not informed to the Police
about the accident and he fled away from the accidental spot by
leaving the offending K.S.R.T.C. Bus and as such, after thorough
investigation, the Investigating Officer has filed a charge sheet as
against both the drivers of the offending K.S.R.T.C. Bus for the
offences punishable under Section 279, 338 and 304(A)of IPC
R/w Section 187 of IMV Act. Nowhere in Ex.P.32 Charge Sheet,
the Investigation Officer, has made an allegation as against the
Petitioner in M.V.C. No.6078/2013 about his negligence in the
commission of the said road traffic accident. If really, the Police
SCCH-7 35 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
have registered a false case and filed a false Charge Sheet as
against the R.W.1, the R.W.1 could have been definitely
challenged the same before the Hon'ble Appellate Court by
preferring an appeal or revision. But, no such attempt is made
either by the R.W.1 or his employer, i.e., the Respondent.
32. From the said material evidence, both oral and
documentary, it is clearly proved that, due to very high speed,
rash and negligent manner of driving of the offending K.S.R.T.C.
Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-F-9340 by its driver
itself, i.e., R.W.1, the said road traffic accident was taken place
on 15.09.2013 at 11.15 a.m., which dashed to the Mitsubishi
Lancer Car bearing Registration No.KA-22-M-6353, which was
driving by the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 and due to
which, the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 had sustained
grievous injuries and the parents of the Petitioners in
M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and M.V.C.No.3459/2014, namely Sri.
Venkatarao and Smt. Prameela, who were travelling in the said
Car, succumbed to the accidental injuries. The very involvement
of the offending K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration
No.KA-01-F-9340 as well as its driver, i.e., R.W.1, in the said
road traffic accident is clearly proved. Accordingly, I answered
Issue No.1 in all the cases in the Affirmative.
33. ISSUES NO.2 IN ALL THE CASES :-
34. M.V.C.NO.6078/2013 :- The P.W.1 has stated that,
at the time of accident, he was aged about 29 years. The
Petitioner has produced Ex.P.10 Driving Licence relating to him,
SCCH-7 36 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
which disclosed that, his date of birth is on 01.06.1982. The date
of accident is on 15.09.2013. On perusal of the said dates, it
appears that, at the time of accident, the Petitioner was 32 years
old. Hence, the age of the Petitioner is considered as 32 years at
the time of accident.
35. The P.W.1 has stated that, before the accident, he was
hale and healthy and he was working as a Stunt Man in
Kannada Film Industry since 2000 under Card No.1432/131
issued by All Karnataka Stunt Director's and Stunt Artist's
Association (Regd.) and he was also doing glass breaking work for
films and for the said job, he was getting Rupees 5,000/- per
day. He has further stated that, for stunt man job, he was getting
Rupees 2,432/- per day along with Batta and conveyance
charges of Rupees 450/- per day along with and for his
profession as a Stunt man, he was earning more than Rupees
50,000/- to Rupees 60,000/- per month and he was also one of
the Committee Member of All Karnataka Stunt Director's and
Artist's Association (Regd.). The Petitioner has produced Ex.P.11
Identity Card relating to him and Ex.P.12 Certificate issued by
the Karnataka Stunt Director's and Stunt Artist's Association
(Regd.), which disclosed that, since many years, the Petitioner is
working as a Stunt Artist and his Card No.1432/131 and he was
getting income of Rupees 50,000/- to Rupees 60,000/- p.m.
36. The Petitioner has also examined the General
Secretary of the Karnataka Stunt Director's and Stunt Artist's
Association (Regd.), as P.W.4, who has stated in his examination-
in-chief that, the Petitioner is also one of the member of the said
SCCH-7 37 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
Association and he has worked as a Stunt Artist in the said
Association since 2000 and also worked for Kannada Film
Industries by participating 300 to 350 Films as a Stunt Artist. He
has further stated that, All Karnataka Stunt Directors' and Stunt
Artist's Association (Regd.) has fixed a rate for the work done by
the stunt artist to the films as per the Rate list. He has further
stated that, as per the rate list, every stunt man will get Rupees
2,437/- per day for one or two days work and will get additional
amount of Rupees 1,218/- for additional days and during 2012,
for glass breaking work, the stunt man will get Rupees 4,862/-
and now a days, it was enhanced to Rupees 6,000/- per day as
per the rate fixed by the Association. He has further stated that,
the Petitioner was working as a Stunt Man in Kannada Film
Industry under their Association since 2000, under Membership
Card No.1432/131 issued by the Karnataka Stunt Director's and
Stunt Artist's Association (Regd.) and the Petitioner was well
trained stunt artist and also done stunt directions to several
Kannada films and was also doing glass breaking work for films
and for stunt man job, he was getting Rupees 2,432/- per day,
with Bata and conveyance charges of Rupees 450/- per day,
totally, amounting to Rupees 2,882/- per day and for glass
breaking work, the Petitioner getting Rupees 5,000/- to 6,000/-
per film and he was working for a period of 25 days in a month,
i.e., except Sunday's and as a stunt man, the Petitioner was
earning more than Rupees 50,000/- to Rupees 60,000/- per
month and the Petitioner was also one of the committee member
of the Karnataka Stunt Director's and Stunt Artist's Association
(Regd.). The P.W.4 has produced Ex.P.21 Rate List, Ex.P.22 Rate
SCCH-7 38 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
Receipts and Ex.P.23 Remuneration Account Bills 3 in numbers.
He has further stated in his cross-examination that, the
Petitioner has received the remuneration by way of cash.
37. No doubt, it is clear from the said oral version of
P.W.1 and P.W.4 and also from the contents of Ex.P.11, Ex.P.12,
Ex.P.21 to Ex.P.23 that, at the time of accident, the Petitioner
was working as a Stunt Man and he was one of the Committee
member of All Karnataka Stunt Director's and Stunt Artist's
Association (Regd.). But, based on the said oral version of P.W.1
and P.W.4 coupled with the contents of Ex.P.11, Ex.P.12 and
Ex.P.21 to Ex.P.23, it cannot be believed and accept that, at the
time of accident, the Petitioner was earning Rupees 50,000/- to
Rupees 60,000/- per month from his profession as a Stunt Man,
as, the said documents produced by both the Petitioner and
P.W.4 do not clearly disclosed that, in every month, from the said
profession, the Petitioner was getting fixed income of Rupees
50,000/- to Rupees 60,000/-. Further, the Petitioner has not
produced his Bank Statement to show that, at the time of
accident, he was getting income of Rupees 50,000/- to Rupees
60,000/- per month. Further, the P.W.4 in his cross-examination
has clearly stated that, the Petitioner had not worked about 5 - 6
days in a month. From this, it appears that, the Petitioner was
not having a full work in a month. Furthermore, if the Petitioner
was having income of Rupees 50,000/- to Rupees 60,000/- per
month at the time of accident, he could have been definitely filed
an income tax returns. But, the Petitioner has not produced
income tax returns to show his actual income at the time of
SCCH-7 39 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
accident. Therefore, the said evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.4 in
respect of the income of the Petitioner at the time of accident,
cannot believed and accept.
38. However, at the time of accident, the Petitioner was
32 years old, it disclosed that, he is having a family with wife and
children and it is clear from the oral version of P.W.1 and P.W.4
as well as the contents of Ex.P.11, Ex.P.12, Ex.P.21 to Ex.P.23
that, at the time of accident, the Petitioner was working as a
Stunt Man by profession. By considering all these material facts,
this Tribunal feels that, it is just, proper and necessary to
consider the notional income of the Petitioner is of Rupees
10,000/- per month, which is believable and acceptable one.
Hence, the notional income of the Petitioner is considered as
Rupees 10,000/- per month at the time of accident.
39. The P.W.1 has stated that, during the admission in
B.G.S. Global Hospital, he was undergone surgery on 17.09.2013
for wound debridement and patella tendon repair of right knee
and wound debridement and MPFL repair of left knee under GA
on 17.09.2013 and he was kept in ICU and managed
conservatively with serial Hb% and vitals monitoring as he was
hemodynamically stable and he was advised full weight bearing
with help of walker and after the surgery, he was advised to
review every Tuesday and Saturday for wound inspection.
40. The P.W.3, who is the treated Doctor has stated in his
examination-in-chief that, the Petitioner was admitted as an
inpatient in I.C.U. on 15.09.2013 and on 17.09.2013, the
SCCH-7 40 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
Petitioner was underwent left knee MPL injury and a small
avulsion fracture of the medial tibial condyle, for which,
debridement and repair was done and debridement and patella
rendon repair of right knee done by Orthopedic team and the
Petitioner was treated by team of Doctors, like, Orthopedic
Surgeon, Intensivist, Surgical Gastroenterologist,
Physiotherapist, etc., and the Petitioner was discharged from the
Hospital on 23.09.2013 and the Petitioner was advised to go
regular dressing and physiotherapy and to come for the follow-
up. As this Tribunal has already observed about the production
of Ex.P.18 Admission Report and the P.W.3 has also produced
Ex.P.19 Outpatient record and Ex.P.20 X-ray Films two in
numbers. The P.W.3 has further clearly stated in his cross-
examination that, since beginning, he was treated the Petitioner
and he was admitted as an inpatient for 6 days in the Hospital.
Based on Ex.P.6 Wound Certificate, Ex.P.7 Discharge Summary,
Ex.P.18 Admission Records and Ex.P.20 X-ray Films, this
Tribunal has already observed and come to the conclusion that,
in the said road traffic accident, the Petitioner had sustained
Grade IV Splenic injury, left renal injury grade II, right patellar
tendon avulsion, left knee medial patello femoralter and small
avulsion fracture medial tibial condyle, i.e., 6 grievous injuries
and by admitting as an inpatient from 15.09.2013 to 27.09.2013,
i.e., for 13 days, he took treatment to the said accidental injuries
at B.G.S. Global Hospital. It is also clearly mentioned in Ex.P.7
Discharge Summary that, the Petitioner was underwent
debridement and patella tendon repair of right knee and wound
debridement and MPFL repair knee under GA on 17.09.2013 and
SCCH-7 41 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
he had low grade fever following day 2nd of surgery, wound swab
culture from operated site grew E.coli, sensitive antigiotics were
started and he has been advised full weight bearing help of
walker and he is hemodynamically stable and on oral diet at
discharge. From this medical evidence, it is made crystal clear
that, even after discharge from the Hospital on 27.09.2013, the
Petitioner was very much required the regular follow-up
treatment to the said accidental injuries and as such, he had
taken follow-up treatment as per the advise of the treated
Doctors. Hence, the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.3 in respect of the
line of treatment given to the Petitioner during the course of
treatment and line of follow-up treatment taken by the Petitioner
after discharge from the Hospital as per the advise of the treated
Doctors, can very well be believed and accept.
41. The P.W.1 has stated that, due to the said accident,
he had lost his bright future and he cannot able to perform his
stunt actions in future and the said accident spoiled his entire
and in future at any point of time, he cannot regain his original
condition as earlier to the said accident and he cannot carry his
profession as Stunt Man in film Industry. He has further stated
that, due to the said injuries sustained in the said accident, now
he is leading his life with walker only, which caused him a great
difficulty and hardship and have to put to very critical condition
to do his routine work regularly and the said accident caused
heavy loss to him, as such, he could not able to do his work for
his livelihood in future and as such, he has lost his entire future
life and due to permanent disability caused to him he became
SCCH-7 42 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
dependent on other and he is only the earning member of his
family and before the accident, he has taken care of his family in
each and every aspect by looking after his father and mother,
who are aged about 60 years and 50 years respectively, along
with his younger brother and due to the said accident, his entire
family was put to great hardship and irreparable loss and they
became dependent on others for their livelihood, as such, he was
only the bread earner in the family and due to the said injuries,
he became totally disabled to attend his routine work in future
he became permanently disabled and suffered heavy loss and he
is still under treatment for the injuries sustained in the said
accident. He has further stated that, in the circumstances, he
has been put to total loss in his future life by developing
permanent disablement with intolerable pains day and night and
he is claiming Rupees 85,00,000/- under the head of general
damages including permanent disturbance in his future life, total
loss of income in his future life, permanent disablement, loss of
life, loss of amenities and nourishments. He has further stated
that, he could not regain his original condition at any time in
future after the said accident in spite of best and continuous
treatment taken by him.
42. The P.W.3, who is a treated Doctor has stated in his
examination-in-chief that, he recently examined the Petitioner on
20.03.2015 for the assessment of disability and now, the
Petitioner complains of pain over the both lower limbs and the
same caused difficulty to move around due to stiffness and giving
way of joints and occasionally locking of knew joint and the
SCCH-7 43 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
Petitioner was complained of thigh wasting and stiffness of knee
joints and due to the same, the Petitioner has difficulty to stand
and walk and the Petitioner is knee brace to stand and walk due
to ligament injuries and the Petitioner cannot stand for long
duration of time and unable to perform his duties and the
Petitioner has great difficulty in sitting on the floor, squatting
and while climbing the stairs and limited right knee and partial
left knee, ankle movement and the Petitioner has stiffness and
contracture of joints with muscle wasting and sever pain. He has
further stated that, as the several complaints and pains, the
Petitioner is disabled and totally dependent with brace for daily
activities and the X-ray taken recently shows osteopenia and
satisfactory union of fracture tibia and MRI also shows partial
thickness tear of AC ligament of tibial ligament, diffuse thinning
of the medial facet of the patellat articular cartilage with fraying
and fissyre of more than 50%. He has further stated that,
because of above mentioned issues, the Petitioner has 68.73%
disability plus 3% for pain and the Petitioner has totally disability
for lower limb 71.73% and total body disability is 23.91% as per
the Guidelines of Evaluation and Disabilities Government of
India. The P.W.2 has produced Ex.P.18 Admission Record,
Ex.P.19 Guidelines for assessment of disability and Out Patient
File and Ex.P.20 X-ray films 2 in numbers.
43. But, based on the said oral version of P.W.1 and
P.W.3 coupled with the contents of Ex.P.18 to Ex.P.20, it cannot
be believed and accept that, due to the said accidental injuries,
the Petitioner is suffering disability for lower limb 71.73% and
SCCH-7 44 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
total body disability is 23.91%, as, though the Petitioner has
proved that, at the time of accident, he was a Stunt Man by
profession, he has not proved his income and no authenticated
documents are produced by the Petitioner to show that, after
discharge, he became jobless and he is not doing the said
profession. Furthermore, no disability certificate is produced by
the Petitioner to consider the said difficulties arising out of the
said accidental injuries to him. Further, if the said extent of
71.73% disability of lower limb as stated by the P.W.3 is really
suffering by the Petitioner, the Petitioner is not in a position to
move and to do any activities. Therefore, the said extent of
disability stated by the P.W.3 is on higher side and not
considerable one and as such, it is discarded.
44. However, at the time of accident, the Petitioner was a
Stunt Man by profession and he had sustained 6 grievous
injuries in the said road traffic accident and he underwent
operation by admitting as an inpatient for 13 days and he was
regularly taking follow-up treatment as per the advise of the
treated Doctors and he was 32 years old at the time of accident,
by considering all these material facts, which are available on
record, it is found that, due to the said accidental injuries, the
Petitioner is definitely suffering from permanent physical and
functional disability to some extent. By considering the same,
this Tribunal feels that, due to the said accidental injuries, the
Petitioner is suffering from permanent physical and functional
disability of 15% to the whole body, which is believable and
acceptable one.
SCCH-7 45 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
45. As this Tribunal has already come to the conclusion
that, the permanent physical and functional disability of the
Petitioner is of 15%. This would certainly come in the way of the
future life of the Petitioner and thereby, his income to that extent
would be definitely reduced. Therefore, the Petitioner is entitled
for future loss of income arising out of the permanent physical
and functional disability of 15%.
46. As this Tribunal has already come to the conclusion
that, the age of the Petitioner was 32 years at the time of
accident. The multiplier corresponding to the said age as per
Sarala Varma's case is 16.
47. As the Petitioner is suffering from permanent physical
and functional disability of 15% to the whole body. The notional
income of the Petitioner is already considered as Rupees
10,000/- per month. Therefore, the loss arising out of the said
15% disability for monthly income of Rupees 10,000/- by
applying multiplier 16 would comes to Rupees 2,88,000/-, i.e.,
(Rs.10,000/- x 12 x 16 x 15%).
48. As per Ex.P.6 Wound Certificate and evidence of
P.W.1 and P.W.3, the Petitioner had sustained six grievous
injuries. The Petitioner was in the Hospital as an inpatient from
15.09.2013 to 27.09.2013, i.e., for 13 days. Due to the said
injuries, the Petitioner could have definitely suffered a lot of pain
and agony. Considering the said aspects, it is just, proper and
necessary to award a sum of Rupees 1,00,000/- towards pain
and suffering.
SCCH-7 46 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
49. As it is already observed that, the age of the Petitioner
was 32 years. He has to lead remaining his entire life with 15%
permanent physical and functional disability, which comes in the
way of enjoyment of life. Therefore, it is just and proper to award
a sum of Rupees 15,000/- towards loss of amenities of life to the
Petitioner.
50. The Petitioner had sustained six grievous injuries and
he was in the Hospital as an inpatient for 13 days and he could
not do any work at least for 3 months and thereby, he deprived
the income. Therefore, at the rate of Rupees 10,000/- per month,
a sum of Rupees 30,000/- is awarded towards loss of income
during the laid up period.
51. The P.W.1 has stated that, he has incurred more than
Rupees 2,50,000/- towards the medical treatment and also
Rupees 50,000/- towards the transportation and nourishment.
In this regard, the Petitioner has produced Ex.P.8 Medical Bills
13 in numbers, which is amounting of Rupees 2,07,630/- and
Ex.P.9 Medical Prescriptions 2 in numbers. The Petitioner has
taken treatment at B.G.S. Global Hospital, wherein, he was taken
treatment as an inpatient from 15.09.2013 to 27.09.2013, i.e.,
for 13 days. Considering the nature of the injuries and line of
treatment given to the Petitioner, the possibility of spending the
said amount for the medicines cannot be doubted. Therefore, it is
necessary to award the said actual medical expenses of Rupees
2,07,630/- to the Petitioner.
SCCH-7 47 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
52. The P.W.1 has stated that, he has advised to take
further treatment, which costs more than Rupees 50,000/-. The
P.W.3 has stated that, due to the injuries sustained in the said
accident, the Petitioner has to undergo Athroscopic ACL repair,
which costs around 1.7 lakhs approximately and requires good
physiotherapy. It is clearly mentioned in Ex.P.7 Discharge
Summary that, the Petitioner underwent wound debremendment
and patella tendon repair of right knee wound debridgement and
MPFL repair of left knee under G.A. on 17.09.2013. Further, the
P.W.3 in his cross-examination has stated that, the Petitioner is
having legamentary problem and if the Petitioner underwent the
surgery as stated by him, the extent of disability will be reduced
to some extent. Furthermore, the Petitioner was working as a
stunt man. By considering the nature of injuries and line of
treatment and also the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.3, it appears
that, the Petitioner requires future medical treatment and as
such, he requires the amount for future medical expenses.
Neither the Petitioner nor P.W.3 produced the estimation for
future surgery. However, this Tribunal feels that, it is just, proper
and necessary to award future medical expenses of Rupees
25,000/-.
53. As the Petitioner was taken treatment as an inpatient
for 13 days, it is necessary to award a sum of Rupees 3,000/-
towards conveyance charges, Rupees 3,000/- towards attendant
charges and Rupees 5,000/- towards food, nourishment and diet
charges etc.,
SCCH-7 48 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
54. In this way, the Petitioner is entitled for the following
amount of compensation:-
Sl. No. Compensation heads Compensation amount
Loss of future income
1. Rs. 2,88,000-00
arising out of 15% Disability
2. Pain and sufferings Rs. 1,00,000-00
3. Loss of amenities of life Rs. 15,000-00
Loss of income during laid
4. Rs. 30,000-00
up period
5. Actual medical expenses Rs. 2,07,630-00
6. Future medical expenses Rs. 25,000-00
7. Conveyance Rs. 3,000-00
8. Attendant Charges Rs. 3,000-00
Food, Nourishment &
9. Rs. 5,000-00
Diet charges
TOTAL Rs. 6,76,630-00
55. In all, the Petitioner is entitled for total compensation
of Rupees 6,76,630/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per
annum on the above said sum (excluding future medical
expenses of Rupees 25,000/-) from the date of petition till
payment.
56. IN M.V.C.NO.6127/2013 AND M.V.C.
NO.3459/2014 :- The P.W.2 has stated that, due to the said
accident, their father Sri. Venkata Rao.Y.N. died on the spot due
to the injuries sustained in the said accident and their mother
Smt. Prameela sustained severe injuries on the spot and taken to
Mandya District Hospital and due to the grievous injuries
sustained by Smt. Prameela, she died in the Hospital at about
SCCH-7 49 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
12.15 p.m., and Postmortems were conducted at Mandya District
Hospital.
57. The Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and M.V.C.
3459/2014 have produced Ex.P.13 and Ex.P.14 Inquest
Mahazar, Ex.P.15 and Ex.P.16 Postmortem Reports, Ex.P.17
Licence, Ex.P.24 Genealogical Tree by way of affidavit, Ex.P.25
Death Certificate relating to Venkatarao.Y.N., Ex.P.26 Death
Certificate relating to Pramila, Ex.P.27 Adhaar Card relating to
Venkatarao.Y.N., Ex.P.28 Adhaar Card relating to Pramila,
Ex.P.29 Adhaar Card relating Narahari.Y.V., i.e., the Petitioner
No.1, Ex.P.30 Adhaar Card relating to Aditya.Y.V, i.e., the
Petitioner No.2 and Ex.P.31 Driving Licence relating to
Narahari.Y.V., i.e., the Petitioner No.1.
58. On perusal of the content of the said documents as
well as oral version of P.W.2, it clearly goes to show that,
deceased Sri.Venkatarao.Y.N. S/o Late Narasimha Rao and Smt.
Prameela Rao W/o Late Venkat Rao.Y.N., are the parents of the
said Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and
M.V.C.No.3459/2014 and the Petitioners are major sons of both
the said deceased at the time of accident. No doubt, Ex.P.17
Licence relating to the deceased Venkatarao clearly disclosed
that, at the time of accident, he was a deed writer. Since the
Petitioners are major sons of both the deceased, they are
considered as the legal representatives of the said both deceased.
But, based on the same, it cannot be considered and said that, at
the time of accident, the Petitioners in both the cases were the
dependents of both the deceased, as, it is clear from the contents
SCCH-7 50 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
of the above said material documents that, at the time of
accident, both the Petitioners in both the cases were majors.
Therefore, the Petitioners cannot be considered as dependents of
both the deceased at the time of accident.
59. In view of the above said reasons, the Petitioners in
both the cases are not entitled for loss of dependency arising out
of the death of their parents in the said road traffic accident.
60. However, as, the Petitioners in both the cases are
major sons of both the deceased, they are entitled for
compensation towards loss of love and affection, loss of estate,
funeral expenses and transportation of dead body.
61. The contents of Ex.P.27 Adhaar Card relating to
deceased Venkatarao disclosed that, his birth year is 1948. The
date of accident is on 15.09.2013. From this, it appears that, at
the time of accident, the deceased Venkatarao was 65 years old.
62. The contents of Ex.P.28 Adhaar Card relating to
deceased Pramila disclosed that, her birth year is 1958. The date
of accident is on 15.09.2013. From this, it appears that, at the
time of accident, the deceased Pramila was 55 years old.
63. On perusal of the age of the deceased parents of both
the Petitioners, it appears that, they were aged persons at the
time of accident.
SCCH-7 51 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
64. It is also clear from the content of Ex.P.14 Inquest
and Ex.P.16 Postmortem Report that, at the time of accident, the
deceased Pramila was a house wife and the Petitioners are the
major sons. The deceased Venkatarao was admittedly a husband
of deceased Smt. Pramila. From this, it appears that, the
deceased Smt. Pramila was a house wife residing along with her
husband and major sons at the time of accident and leading her
life with the income of her deceased husband as he was a deed
writer.
65. As this Tribunal has already held that, at the time of
accident, the deceased Venkatarao.Y.N., was 65 years old and
the Petitioners are not the dependents of the deceased, as, they
are major sons of the said deceased. Hence, the Petitioners are
not entitled for any compensation towards loss of dependency in
view of death of their father, namely, Venkatarao.Y.N. S/o Late
Narasimha Rao.
66. As per the principles laid down in the decision
reported in 2013 ACJ 1403 (Rajesh and Others V/s Rajbir
Singh and Others), loss of love and affection has to be
compensated by awarding Rupees 25,000/- and funeral expenses
should be Rupees 25,000/-. As this Tribunal has already
observed that, the Petitioners No.1 and 2 are the major sons of
the deceased Venkatarao.Y.N. Hence, the Petitioners No.1 and 2
are entitled for a sum of Rupees 25,000/- towards loss of love
and affection and Rupees 25,000/- towards funeral expenses.
SCCH-7 52 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
67. Rupees 5,000/- is awarded towards expenses of
transportation of dead body and Rupees 25,000/- is awarded
towards loss of estate.
68. In this way, the Petitioners are entitled for the
following amount of compensation:-
Sl. No. Compensation heads Compensation amount
1. Funeral Expenses Rs. 25,000-00
2. Loss of Love and affection Rs. 25,000-00
3. Expenses of transportation Rs. 5,000-00
of dead body
4. Loss of Estate Rs. 25,000-00
TOTAL Rs. 80,000-00
69. In all, the Petitioners are entitled for total
compensation of Rupees 80,000/- along with interest at the rate
of 6% per annum on the above said sum from the date of petition
till payment, in respect of the death of Sri. Venkatarao.Y.N. S/o
Late Narasimha Rao.
70. As this Tribunal already held that, at the time of
accident, the deceased was a non-earning member and the
Petitioners are not the dependents of the deceased. Hence, the
Petitioners are not entitled for any compensation towards loss of
dependency in view of death of their mother, namely, Smt.
Prameela W/o Late Venkat Rao.
71. As this Tribunal already held that, at the time of
accident, the deceased was 55 years and the Petitioners are not
SCCH-7 53 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
the dependents of the deceased, as they are major sons of the
deceased. Hence, the Petitioners are not entitled for any
compensation towards loss of dependency in view of death of
their mother, namely, Smt. Prameela W/o Late Venkat Rao.
72. As per the principles laid down in the decision
reported in 2013 ACJ 1403 (Rajesh and Others V/s Rajbir
Singh and Others), loss of love and affection has to be
compensated by awarding Rupees 25,000/- and funeral expenses
should be Rupees 25,000/-. As this Tribunal has already
observed that, the Petitioners No.1 and 2 are the major sons of
the deceased. Hence, the Petitioners No.1 and 2 are entitled for a
sum of Rupees 25,000/- towards loss of love and affection and
Rupees 25,000/- towards funeral expenses.
73. Rupees 5,000/- is awarded towards expenses of
transportation of dead body and Rupees 25,000/- is awarded
towards loss of estate.
74. In this way, the Petitioners are entitled for the
following amount of compensation:-
Sl. No. Compensation heads Compensation amount
1. Funeral Expenses Rs. 25,000-00
2. Loss of Love and affection Rs. 25,000-00
3. Expenses of transportation Rs. 5,000-00
of dead body
4. Loss of Estate Rs. 25,000-00
TOTAL Rs. 80,000-00
SCCH-7 54 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
75. In all, the Petitioners are entitled for total
compensation of Rupees 80,000/- along with interest at the rate
of 6% per annum on the above said sum from the date of petition
till payment in respect of the death of Smt. Prameela W/o Late
Venkat Rao.
76. The P.W.1 and P.W.2 has stated that, the Respondent
has failed to settle the claim to his family till date.
77. While answering Issue No.2, this Tribunal has already
come to the conclusion that, the offending K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav,
Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-F-9340 as well as its driver,
i.e., R.W.1, are very much involved in the said road traffic
accident, wherein, the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 had
sustained six grievous injuries and father of the Petitioners in
M.V.C.No.6127/2013, namely, Sri.Venkata Rao. Y.N. S/o Late
Narasimha Rao succumbed to the accidental injuries on the spot
itself and mother of the Petitioners in M.V.C.No.3459/2014,
namely, Smt. Prameela Rao W/o Late Venkat Rao. Y.N.
succumbed to the accidental injuries during the course of
treatment in the Hospital and the said accident was taken place
due to high speed, rash and negligent manner of driving of the
said offending K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration
No.KA-01-F-9340 by its driver, i.e., R.W.1. The Petitioners in all
the cases have clearly mentioned in the cause title of all the
petitions that, the Managing Director, Karnataka State Road
Transport Corporation, i.e., the Respondent No.2 in
M.V.C.No.6078/2013 and M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and the
SCCH-7 55 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
Respondent in M.V.C.No.3459/2014 is a Registered Owner of the
offending K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-
F-9340. The same has not been disputed by the said Respondent
in the written statement. The said Respondent being a R.C.
Owner is also an internal insurer of the said offending K.S.R.T.C.
Vaibhav Bus bearing Registration No.KA-01-F-9340. There is no
allegation leveled as against the driver of the K.S.R.T.C. Bus in
Ex.P.32 Charge Sheet that, at the time of accident, he was not
having a valid and effective driving licence to drive such class of
offending vehicle. It is clear from the evidence of R.W.1 that, at
the time of accident, the driver of the said offending Bus was
under the course of employment of Respondent. Under the said
circumstances, the Respondent being a R.C. Owner and also an
internal insurer of the offending K.S.R.T.C. Vaibhav Bus bearing
Registration No.KA-01-F-9340 is liable to pay the above said
compensation and interest to the Petitioners in all the cases.
Though it is stated by the said Respondent in the written
statement filed in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and
M.V.C.No.3459/2014 that, he has paid Rupees 15,000/- towards
each death to the Petitioners of the said cases as interim relief on
humanitarian grounds and the same may be deducted from the
compensation if any awarded in the said cases, the same has not
been proved by the said Respondent. Further, the R.W.1 has not
stated anything about the same in his examination-in-chief.
Further, no question or suggestion put to P.W.2 while cross-
examining him by the said Respondent in respect of payment of
the said amount of Rupees 15,000/- each to the Petitioners of
the said cases. Therefore, the amount of Rupees 15,000/- each
SCCH-7 56 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013
and 3459/2014
paid by the said Respondent to the Petitioners in
M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and M.V.C.No.3459/2014 as interim relief
cannot be taken into for consideration as not proved. Hence,
Issue No.2 in all the cases, are answered accordingly.
78. ISSUE NO.3 IN ALL THE CASES :- For the aforesaid
reasons, I proceed to pass the following,
ORDER
The petitions filed by the Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6078/2013, M.V.C.No.6127/2013, and M.V.C.No.3459/2014 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, are hereby partly allowed with costs.
The Petitioner in
M.V.C.No.6078/2013 is entitled for
compensation of Rupees 6,76,630/-
with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. (excluding future medical expenses of Rupees 25,000/-) from the date of the petition till the date of payment from the Respondent No.2.
The Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 are entitled for compensation of Rupees 80,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the SCCH-7 57 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013 and 3459/2014 date of the petition till the date of payment, from the Respondent No.2.
The Petitioners in M.V.C.No.3459/2014 are entitled for compensation of Rupees 80,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till the date of payment, from the Respondent.
The Petitioners in
M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and
M.V.C.No.3459/2014 shall share the said compensation and interest in both the cases in the ratio of 50:50.
The Respondent No.2 in
M.V.C.No.6078/2013 and the
Respondent in M.V.C.No.6127/2013
and M.V.C.No.3459/2014 shall deposit the said compensation and interest in this Tribunal, within one month from the date of this Order, in all the cases.
In the event of deposit of compensation and interest in all the cases, 80% amount relating to Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 and the entire amount relating to the Petitioners in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and SCCH-7 58 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013 and 3459/2014 M.V.C.No.3459/2014 shall be released in their favour, respectively, through account payee cheques, on proper identification.
The remaining share of 20% relating to the Petitioner in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 shall be kept in F.D. in his name in any nationaziled Bank of his choice, for a period of 3 years.
Advocate's fee is fixed at Rupees 1,000/- in each case.
Original copy of the Judgment shall be kept in M.V.C.No.6078/2013 and the copy of the same shall be kept in M.V.C.No.6127/2013 and 3459/2014.
Draw award accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and then, pronounced by me in the open Court on this, the 6th day of January, 2016.) (INDIRA MAILSWAMY CHETTIYAR) IX Addl. Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Member, MACT-7, Bangalore.
SCCH-7 59 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013and 3459/2014 ANNEXURE
1. WITNESSES EXAMINED BY THE PETITIONERS :-
P.W.1 : Sri.C.N.Gangaraju P.W.2 : Sri.Narahari Y.V. P.W.3 : Dr.Raju K.P. P.W.4 : C.Shankar
2. DOCUMENTS MARKED BY THE PETITIONERS :-
Ex.P.1 : Copy of FIR
Ex.P.2 : Copy of Statement
Ex.P.3 : Copy of Crime Details Form
Ex.P.4 : Copy of Sketch
Ex.P.5 : Copy of IMV Report
Ex.P.6 : Copy of Wound Certificate
Ex.P.7 : Discharge Summary
Ex.P.8 : 13 Medical Bills
Ex.P.9 : 2 Prescriptions
Ex.P.10 : Notarised Copy of Driving Licence
Ex.P.11 : Notarised Copy ID Card
Ex.P.12 : Certificate
Ex.P.13 and : Copy of Inquest Mahazars
Ex.P.14
Ex.P.15 and : Copy of Postmortem Reports
Ex.P.16
Ex.P.17 : Licence
Ex.P.18 : Admission Record (MVC 6078/2013)
Ex.P.19 : Assessment of Disability Guidelines
and Outpatient File (M.V.C. No.6078/2013) Ex.P.20 : Two X-rays Ex.P.21 : Rate List Ex.P.22 : Eight Rate Receipts Ex.P.23 : Three Remuneration Account Bills Ex.P.24(a) : MRI Scans (3 in numbers) Ex.P.24 : Genealogical Tree by way of Affidavit Ex.P.25 : Death Certificate Relating to Venkatarao Y.N. Ex.P.26 : Death Certificate Relating to Pramila SCCH-7 60 MVC No. 6078/2013, 6127/2013 and 3459/2014 Ex.P.27 : Notarised Xerox Copy of Aadhaar Card Relating to Venkatarao Y.N. Ex.P.28 : Notarised Xerox Copy of Aadhaar Card Relating to Pramila Ex.P.29 : Notarised Xerox Copy of Aadhaar Card Relating to Narahari Y.V. Ex.P.30 : Notarised Xerox Copy of Aadhaar Card Relating to Aditya Y.V. Ex.P.31 : Notarised Xerox Copy of Driving License Relating to Narahari Y.V. Ex.P.32 : True copy of Charge Sheet
3. WITNESSES EXAMINED BY THE RESPONDENTS :-
R.W.1 : M. Kotresha
4. DOCUMENTS MARKED BY THE RESPONDENTS :-
-NIL-
(INDIRA MAILSWAMY CHETTIYAR) IX Addl. Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Member, MACT-7, Bangalore.