Bangalore District Court
Yallamma vs Mohammed Azhar on 30 August, 2024
KABC020318302021
BEFORE THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL
Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru.
DATED THIS THE 30th DAY OF AUGUST 2024
PRESENT: SRI.KUMARA.S (B.A., LL.B)
VII Addl. SCJ and ACJM,
Member, MACT3, Bengaluru.
M.V.C.No.5408/2021
Petitioners : 01. Smt.Yallamma,
W/o Venkatesh,
Aged about 31 years,
02. Kum.Rajeshwari,
D/o Venkatesh,
Aged about 12 years,
03. Master Yogesh,
S/o Venkatesh,
Aged about 09 years,
Since petitioners 2 & 3 are minors,
rep. by their mother and natural
guardian Smt.Yallamma,
All are residing at No.872, 11th Cross,
Weavers Colony,
Bannerghatta Road,
Koli Farm Layout,
(SCCH3) 2 M.V.C.No.5408/2021
Gottigere,
Bangalore 83.
04. Sri.Manjunath,
S/o Ramanna,
Aged about 41 years,
residing at near Halu Block Factory,
Byandahalli,
Bangalore 562 130.
(By Sri.Ravikumar.S.L, Advocate)
V/s
Respondents : 01. Sri.Mohammed Azhar,
S/o Ahmed Pasha,
No.266, 1st Main, 3rd Cross,
Near Tin Factory,
Darga Mohalla,
Vijinapura,
Bangalore - 560 016.
(R.C. Owner of Private Bus bearing
reg. No.KA01AH5155)
(By Sri.Siddananjaiah, Advocate)
02. Sri.Tabeshan,
S/o Hussain,
Shivanapura Village,
Hoskote Taluk,
Bangalore Rural District.
(Driver of Private Bus bearing
reg. No.KA01AH5155)
(Exparte)
*******
(SCCH3) 3 M.V.C.No.5408/2021
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this claim petition against respondents U/Sec 166 of M.V. Act 1989 seeking compensation in respect of death of the deceased Sri.Rangappa S/o Ramanna, who died in Motor Vehicle Accident.
02. The brief facts of the case of the petitioner is as under:
On 04.08.2019 at about 08.20 p.m when the deceased was a pedestrian on the extreme left side of Bengaluru - Bannerghatta Road and was crossing the said road at opposite to JCB Narendra Babu Building Road, at that time suddenly the driver of Private Bus bearing No.KA01AH5155 came from Bengaluru side, in rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased. Due to this the deceased fell down and the front right wheel of the said bus ran on the body of the deceased. Consequent to which the deceased succumbed to fatal injuries and died on the spot. The petitioners have spent Rs.1,00,000/ towards funeral and obsequies ceremonies. Prior to accident the deceased was hale and healthy and was aged about 36 years and was doing Mason work and earning Rs.20,000/ p.m. The petitioner No.1 is the (SCCH3) 4 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 sister, petitioners No.2 and 3 are the children of petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.4 is the brother of the deceased. Due to untimely death of the deceased, the petitioners life has become dark, miserable and depressed and put to great financial hardship without any earning member in the family. The accident occurred due to rash and negligent act of driving of offending private Bus driver and the Bannerghatta Police have registered a case against driver of the said offending private Bus driver. The respondent No.1 being the R.C. owner and respondent No.2 being the driver of the offending private Bus. Hence, they are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation of Rs.20,00,000/ with interest and costs.
03. On service of notice, the respondent No.1 has appeared before the tribunal through his counsel and filed written statement. Inspite of service of notice through paper publication, the respondent No.2 did not appeared before the tribunal and hence, was placed exparte.
04. The respondent No.1 in his written statement has denied the entire case of the petitioner and also denied the alleged accident, age, avocation, income of the deceased, manner of accident and also denied petitioners are the legal representatives and (SCCH3) 5 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 dependents on the deceased and contended that the deceased was unmarried and no dependent at the time of his death and the petitioners are not the legal heirs and not dependent of the deceased and further denied that the accident in not occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the bus driver and it is due to the negligence of the deceased as he was in full drunken state of affairs and the bus was moving slowly and carefully following traffic rules and the deceased crossing the road unmindfully with fully intoxication and without balance came in jigjag manner and in contact with the bus where there is no zebra crossing. The compensation claimed is arbitrary and exorbitant. Hence, pray for dismiss the petition against this respondent with costs.
05. On the basis of the above pleadings of the parties, this tribunal has framed the following Issues: ISSUES
01. Whether petitioners prove that they are the LRs/dependents of deceased Sri.Rangappa S/o Ramanna?
02. Whether petitioners prove that deceased Sri.Rangappa S/o Ramanna died in RTA arising out of the accident alleged to have been taken place on 04.08.2019 at about (SCCH3) 6 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 08.20 p.m, on opposite JCB Narendra Babu Building Road, Bengaluru Bannerghatta Road, Bannerghatta, Bengaluru, due to negligent act of driving of the Bus bearing registration No.KA01AH5155 by its driver as alleged in the petition?
03. Whether petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, what amount & from whom?
04. What order or award?
06. The petitioners in order to prove their case, the petitioner No.1 herself got examined as PW.1 and got marked 13 documents as Ex.P.1 to 13 and closed their side evidence. The respondent No.1 is examined himself as RW.1 and no documents are marked and closed his side evidence.
07. Both sides have not advanced their arguments, hence, both sides arguments is taken as heard and perused the records.
08. My findings on the above Issues are as follows:
Issue No.1 : Partly in the Affirmative Issue No.2 : In the Affirmative Issue No.3 : Partly in the Affirmative (SCCH3) 7 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 Issue No.4 : As per final order for the following: REASONS
09. Issues No.1 and 2: Since these two issues are interconnected to each other and in order to avoid repetition of facts and appreciation of evidence on record, these two issues are taken together for common consideration and discussion.
10. The petitioners in order to prove their case, the petitioner No.1 herself got examined as PW.1 and in her chiefexamination evidence she has reiterated the petition averments therein. During the course of crossexamination by the respondent No.1 counsel she admits that she had married and her husband name is Venkatesh and also stated that she has not residing with her husband and she is residing with her brother and admits that she has not produced any documents to show that she has living along with deceased Rangappa.
11. Apart from the oral evidence, the petitioners have got marked 13 documents as Ex.P.1 to 13. Ex.P.1 is copy of FIR filed by the Bannerghatta Police against driver of offending private Bus for his rash and (SCCH3) 8 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 negligent driving and causing death of deceased. Ex.P.2 is copy of Complaint lodged against driver of offending Bus. Ex.P.3 is copy of Inquest Mahazar of deceased Rangappa. Ex.P.4 is copy of Post mortem report of deceased Rangappa wherein it is stated that deceased died due to shock and hemorrhagic shock as a result of crush injury sustained to the lower abdomen and thighs. Ex.P.5 is copy of Charge sheet which was filed against driver/respondent No.2 of offending Bus for his rash and negligent driving and causing accident and causing death of deceased. Ex.P.6 is copy of IMV report. Ex.P.7 is 'B' register extract of the offending private bus which shows that the respondent No.1 is the owner of the said private bus. Ex.P.8 is copy of Permit of the offending private bus. Ex.P.9 is the copy of Aadhaar card of petitioner No.1. Ex.P.10 is the copy of Aadhaar card of petitioner No.2. Ex.P.11 is the copy of Aadhaar card of petitioner No.3. Ex.P.12 is the copy of Aadhaar card of petitioner No.4 and Ex.P.13 is the copy of Policy schedule which indicates that as on the date of alleged accident the offending private bus had no insurance policy.
12. Therefore, on going through the entire oral and documentary evidence produced by the petitioners, it appears that the petitioner No.1 is the (SCCH3) 9 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 sister, petitioners No.2 and 3 are the minor daughter and minor son of petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.4 is the brother of the deceased Rangappa. It is also appears that deceased Rangappa is a bachelor. The brothers and sisters of the deceased and their children are Class2 heirs. But the sister and brother and their children are not the dependents on the earnings of the deceased. It is evident from the documents that the petitioner No.1 who is the sister of the deceased was married and petitioners No.2 and 3 are her children and petitioner No.4 is the major brother of the deceased Rangappa. Though the petitioner No.1 has claimed that she has not living with her husband and she has living with her brother, but absolutely there is no material on record to show that the petitioner No.1 and her children and petitioner No.4 are residing along with deceased Rangappa and it is also appears that the petitioners are not the dependents on the earnings of the deceased. There is no evidence to show that petitioners are wholly or partly dependents on the earnings. As per Sec.2(D) of Employees Compensation Act, major brothers not included and married sisters not qualify as a dependent. Since the petitioners No.1 and 4 being sister and brother of the deceased, does not fall under any of the category of consortium and (SCCH3) 10 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 are not dependents. Though they are the Class2 heirs of the deceased, but are not dependents on the earnings of the deceased.
13. On perusal of oral evidence of PW.1 and Ex.P.1 to 6 documents, the petitioners have proved that deceased Rangappa was died in road traffic accident that occurred on 04.08.2019 at about 08.20 p.m on Bengaluru - Bannerghatta Road, opposite to JCB Narendra Babu Building Road, due to rash and negligent act of driving of the Private Bus bearing No.KA01AH5155 by its driver. Hence, I answered Issue No.1 partly in the affirmative and Issue No.2 in the affirmative.
14. Issue No.3: This issue is related to the entitlement of the compensation on account of the death of the deceased Rangappa, who died in road traffic accident.
15. The petitioners in their evidence and pleadings have stated that as on the date of alleged accident the deceased was aged about 36 years and hale and healthy and was Mason and earning Rs.20,000/ p.m and have incurred Rs.1,00,000/ towards funeral and obsequies and due to death of deceased petitioners have lost his love and affection (SCCH3) 11 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 and they are the dependents on the earnings of the deceased.
16. It is the duty of the petitioner to prove age, avocation and income of the deceased as on the date of accident. But absolutely there is no evidence on record regarding age, avocation and income. As discussed above, the petitioner No.1 is the sister, petitioners No.2 and 3 are the children of petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.4 is the brother of the deceased Rangappa. Though they are the Class2 heirs, but are not the dependents on the earnings of the deceased. Absolutely there is no evidence on record to show that the petitioners are wholly or partly dependents on the earnings of the deceased. The petitioner No.1 being the sister and having children and residing with her husband as it is shown in Ex.P.9 Aadhaar card of the petitioner No.1. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for compensation under the head of loss of dependency. However, petitioner No.1 being the sister, petitioners No.2 and 3 being the children of petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.4 being the brother of the deceased have lost their love and affection. Accordingly, the petitioners are entitled for compensation under the head of loss of love and affection at Rs.40,000/ (SCCH3) 12 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 each and under the head of loss of estate Rs.18,000/ and under the head of funeral expenses and transportation of deadbody Rs.18,000/.
17. Therefore, this tribunal has placed reliance on ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in a decision reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 in between National Insurance Co. Ltd., V/s. Pranay Sethi & others case has calculated compensation as under;
Sl. Head of Amount in
No. Compensation Rs.
1 Loss of love and affection 1,60,00000
3. Loss of estate 18,00000
4. Funeral expenses and 18,00000
transportation of dead
body
Total 1,96,00000
18. Accordingly I hold that, the petitioners are entitled for total compensation of Rs.1,96,000/ with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.
19. In this case, on behalf of respondent No.1, respondent No.1 himself is examined as RW.1 and in his chiefexamination evidence he has reiterated the written statement averments. In the crossexamination (SCCH3) 13 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 by the petitioners counsel he admits that respondent No.2 is his bus driver and Police have filed Charge sheet against bus driver and also admits that Police have filed Charge sheet against bus driver for rash and negligent driving and also admits that insurance policy of the offending bus was lapsed and also admits that as on the date of accident the bus was plying on the road without insurance policy and also admits that as per Post mortem report deceased was died due to wheel of the bus ran over his body.
20. In this case the respondent No.1 has denied that the petitioners are dependents on the earnings of the deceased. As discussed above, the petitioners are not the dependents on the earnings of the deceased and offending bus has no insurance policy as on the date of accident. Therefore, respondent No.1 being the R.C. Owner of the offending bus and respondent No.2 being the driver of the offending bus are jointly and severally liable to pay above said compensation of Rs.1,96,000/ to the petitioners with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization within two months from the date of this Judgment. Accordingly, this Issue is answered partly in the affirmative.
(SCCH3) 14 M.V.C.No.5408/2021
21. Issue No.4: In view of the above reasoning and discussions to the above Issues No.1 to 3, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition filed by the petitioners under Sec.166 of the M.V. Act, 1989 is partly allowed with costs.
The petitioners are entitled for compensation of Rs.1,96,000/ (Rupees One lakh and ninety six thousand only) with interest at the rate of 6% p.a from the date of petition till its realization.
The respondents No.1 and 2 shall deposit above said compensation amount with interest within two months from the date of this Judgment.
Petitioner No.1 being the sister, petitioners No.2 and 3 are the minor daughter and minor son of petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.4 being the brother of the deceased are entitled for equal share in the award amount.
Since the award amount is meager one, entire share amount with accrued interest of the petitioners No.1 and 4 shall be released in their favour through (SCCH3) 15 M.V.C.No.5408/2021 Epayment directly to their account by obtaining the bank account details.
Since the petitioners No.2 and 3 are minors, on deposit of the award amount accrued with interest, the entire share of the petitioners No.2 and 3 shall be kept in Fixed Deposit in any Schedule Bank till they attain age of majority with a liberty to draw accrued interest in the name of minor petitioners No.2 and 3 by their natural guardian on the said fixed deposit once in 3 months for the benefit of minor petitioners No.2 and 3.
The Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.1,000/. Draw award accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript thereof is corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court on this the 30th day of August, 2024) Digitally signed KUMARA by KUMARA S S Date: 2024.08.31 15:41:52 +0530 (KUMARA.S) VII Addl. Judge and ACJM, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for the petitioners:
P.W.1 Yallamma
(SCCH3) 16 M.V.C.No.5408/2021
List of documents marked on behalf of the
petitioners:
Ex.P.1 Certified copy of FIR
Ex.P.2 Certified copy of Complaint
Ex.P.3 Certified copy of Inquest Mahazar
Ex.P,4 Certified copy of Post mortem report
Ex.P.5 Certified copy of Charge sheet
Ex.P.6 Certified copy of IMV report
Ex.P.7 Certified copy of Bregister extract
Ex.P.8 Certified copy of Permit
Ex.P.9 Notarized copy of Aadhaar card of petitioner
No.1
Ex.P.10 Notarized copy of Aadhaar card of petitioner
No.2
Ex.P.11 Notarized copy of Aadhaar card of petitioner
No.3
Ex.P.12 Notarized copy of Aadhaar card of petitioner
No.4
Ex.P.13 Certified copy of Policy
List of witnesses examined for the Respondents:
R.W.1 Mohammed Azhar
List of documents marked on behalf of the
Respondents:
Nil
Digitally signed
KUMARA by KUMARA S
Date:
S 2024.08.31
15:42:03 +0530
(KUMARA.S)
VII Addl. Judge and ACJM,
Bengaluru.