The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:810 MFA No. 1036 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1036 OF 2023 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. INA KOUSAR @ HEENA KOUSAR W/O.LATE SADDAM HUSSEN @ MOHAMMED SADDAM AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 2. ZEHARA BEE D/O.LATE SADDAM HUSSEN @ MOHAMMED SADDAM AGED ABOUT 05 YEARS (A-2 IS A MINOR REP. BY HER MOTHER, A-1 AS A NATURAL GUARDIAN) A-1 AND A-2 ARE R/AT NO.601, 7TH CROSS 'C' BLOCK, SUBESH NAGAR BENGALURU-560 068 3. MOHAMMED AMEETH S/O.MOHAMMED USEN AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS 4. PRAVEENTAJ W/O.MOHAMMED AMEETH D/O.SAIED IQBAL AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS A-3 AND A-4 ARE R/AT NO.57/74, KITTAPANKUTTAI HOSUR, KRSHNAGIRI TAMIL NADU-635 109 Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI K.B.CHANDRASHEKARA SWAMY, ADVOCATE) …APPELLANTS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:810 MFA No. 1036 of 2023 AND: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S.TNSTC LTD. NO.12, RAMAKRISHNA RAO SELAM REGION AT DHARMAPURI BHARATHIPURAM TAMIL NADU-636 705 (BY SRI B.PURANDARA, ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENT THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.01.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.5630/2019 BY III ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 12.01.2021 passed in MVC.No.5630/2019 by the Court of III Additional Small Causes Judge and ACMM, Bengaluru (for short ‘the tribunal’). This appeal is founded on the premise of inadequacy of compensation awarded by the tribunal. 2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the tribunal. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:810 MFA No. 1036 of 2023 3. Brief facts of the case are as under: On 29.08.2019 at about 2.30 p.m., one Saddam Hussen @ Mohammed Saddam was proceeding in his motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-03-JW-4603 along with his wife and daughter, at that time, a Bus bearing registration No.TN-29-N-3074 came with high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the said motor cycle. Due to which, the said Saddam Hussen @ Mohammed Saddam fell down and sustained grievous injures and succumbed to the same on the way to the Hospital. Hence, the claimants, who are the wife, daughter and parents of the deceased filed a claim petition seeking compensation. 3.1 On the basis of material evidence, both oral and documentary and on hearing the submissions of learned counsels for both parties, the tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.22,24,900/- with interest @ 8% p.a. and directed respondent-Corporation to deposit the compensation amount within two months. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:810 MFA No. 1036 of 2023 3.2 Being aggrieved by the meager compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimants are before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. 4. Learned counsel for appellants-claimants submits that the tribunal has committed an error in awarding meager compensation including the income, which calls for interference at the hands of this Court. Hence, he seeks to enhance the compensation. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent- Corporation vehemently objects to the arguments put- forth by learned counsel for claimants on the ground that the compensation awarded is on the higher side and the income taken is correct, which does not call for interference. He finds flaw with the judgment and award passed by the tribunal on the ground that the deduction towards personal and living expenses taken at 1/4th is erroneous. As the parents are not the dependants, the deduction ought to have been taken at 1/3rd. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:810 MFA No. 1036 of 2023 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants-claimants and learned counsel for respondent- Corporation and perused the impugned judgment and award, the occurrence of accident, involvement of vehicle, death having occurred due to the Road Traffic Accident are proved and established by production of Exs.P1 to P11. The appellants-claimant Nos.1 and 2 being the wife and daughter of the deceased and claimant No.3 being the father, is not disputed. However, in the course of arguments, learned counsel disputes that appellant No.4 being the mother of the deceased, as she was aged 36 years and the deceased was aged 29 years as on the date of occurrence of accident. This aspects has not been pleaded or confronted in the evidence before the tribunal. Further, no such issue has been framed or raised by the tribunal. On the contrary, the tribunal has decided in the affirmative that the appellants-claimants to be the dependants and legal heirs of the deceased. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:810 MFA No. 1036 of 2023 7. Now coming to the age, avocation and income of the deceased as on the date of occurrence of accident, it is not in dispute that the deceased was aged 29 years as on the date of occurrence of accident and the multiplier taken by the tribunal at '17' is correct, which does not call for interference. The tribunal has taken the income at Rs.9,500/- per month. However, the Legal Services Authority chart prescribes the notional income of Rs.14,000/- per month for the accident of the year 2019 and the same is taken in the present case. Under the circumstances, the claimants would be entitled to the compensation of Rs.29,98,800/- (Rs.14,000/- + 40% = Rs.19,600/- - 1/4th = Rs.14,700/- x 12 x 17) towards loss of dependency as against Rs.20,34,900/- awarded by the tribunal. 8. The tribunal awarded Rs.1,60,000/- towards loss of consortium, which does not call for interference. However, 10% escalation on the same is to be awarded - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:810 MFA No. 1036 of 2023 under this head, which would be Rs.1,76,000/- (Rs.1,60,000/- + 10%). 9. The tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- towards transportation of dead body, funeral and obsequies ceremony expenses, which also do not call for interference. In all, the claimants would be entitled to Rs.30,000/- under these heads. However, 10% escalation on the same is to be awarded, which would be Rs.33,000/- (Rs.30,000/- + 10%). 10. In view of the above, the claimants would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.32,07,800/- as against Rs.22,24,900/- as mentioned in the table below: Heads Loss of dependency Loss of consortium Loss of estate, transportation of dead and obsequies ceremony expenses funeral body, Amount in Rs. 29,98,800-00 1,76,000-00 33,000-00 TOTAL 32,07,800-00 11. Accordingly, I pass the following: i)
Decision
The appeal is allowed-in-part; ORDER - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:810 MFA No. 1036 of 2023 ii) The judgment and award dated 12.01.2021 passed in MVC.No.5630/2019 by the Court of III Additional Small Causes Judge and ACMM, Bengaluru, is modified; iii) The claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.32,07,800/- as against Rs.22,24,900/- along with interest @ 8% p.a.; iv) The enhanced compensation amount shall be paid with interest at 6% per annum within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; v) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal are undisturbed and retained. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE LB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56