AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—These appeals by the claimants, parents of the deceased and by the Corporation, respectively, are directed against the same impugned judgment and award. dated 06/08/2011 passed in MVC No. 60/2010, by the Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C. and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Arasikere, (hereinafter referred to as '' Tribunal'' for short).
The Tribunal, by its judgment and award, has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,17,000/- awarded by the Tribunal as compensation under different heads with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till payment, as against the claim of Rs. 30,50,000/-, on account of the death of the deceased Sri. Basavalinge Gowda., in the road traffic accident. It is the case of the claimants that the quantum of compensation awarded is inadequate and it requires enhancement and whereas, it is the case of the Corporation that, as the claim petition filed by the claimants u/s 163A of M.V. Act, itself is not maintainable, the question of awarding the compensation does not arise at all and the petition is liable to be dismissed.
In brief, the facts of the case are:
The claimants are the parents of the deceased. They filed a claim petition before the Tribunal u/s 163A of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondent-Corporation, on account of the death of the deceased in the accident, contending that on 1.6.2008 at about 4.00 p.m. the deceased was driving the bus bearing Reg. No. KA. 18.F. 273 belonging to the Corporation near Jakkanahalli gate, Kibbanahalli Hobli, Tiptur taluk and dashed against the road side tree. Due to which, he sustained grievous injuries and immediately, he was shifted to General Hospital Tiptur, but he succumbed to the injuries.
It is the further case of the appellants that, deceased was aged about 32 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, and working as driver in the Corporation and earning a sum Rs. 12,000/- per month and looking after the welfare of the family and on account of his untimely death, claimants have suffered mental shock and agony, apart from financial loss as they have lost their bread earner.
The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation of Rs. 4,17,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its payment. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the claimants and the Corporation have presented these appeals, seeking appropriate reliefs as stated supra
We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the claimants and learned counsel appearing for Corporation.
The submission of the learned counsel Sri. Lokesh Kumar: appearing for the claimants, at the outset is that., the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal on account of the untimely death of the deceased who was working as Trainee Driver in the Corporation on account of the fatal injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident is inadequate and is liable to be enhanced. He further submits that the claimants are the parents of the deceased and deceased was getting the salary of Rs. 3,800/- per month and the Tribunal ought to have taken his income atleast at Rs. 3,600/- per month since the petition is filed u/s 163A of M.V. Act and awarded reasonable compensation towards loss of dependency. He further submits that the Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation towards conventional heads as permissible u/s 163A of M.V. Act. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified.
Per contra, learned counsel Smt. H.R. Renuka, appearing for Corporation, at the outset submitted that the claim petition filed by the claimants u/s 163A of M.V. Act, is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed in limini. If at all, if the claimants are entitled for any compensation, they might have redressed their grievance under Workmens'' Compensation Act before the competent authority. She further submits that, if the income of the deceased is taken at Rs. 2,500/- per month and 50% is deducted towards his personal and living expenses and applying relevant factor taking his age, what is awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and is liable to be reduced by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and after careful perusal of the original records available on file, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, it emerges that, the occurrence of the accident and the resultant death of the deceased are not in dispute It is also not in dispute that, deceased was aged about 31 years, hale and healthy prior to the accident, working as Trainee driver in the Corporation, the only earning member in the family and claimants are his parents. It is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for Corporation that, if the claimants want to redress their grievance, the only remedy open to them is to file a claim petition under Workmen''s'' Compensation Act. The said submission cannot be accepted, at this distance of time. After perusal of the entire original records available on file and if we take the income of the deceased at Rs. 2,500/- per month and apply relevant factor as per the Workmen''s'' Compensation Act, the compensation comes little less than what is awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, taking judicial note of this fact and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we cannot accept the ground urged by the Corporation as she has not disputed that deceased was a Trainee Driver in the Corporation and claimants are his parents and therefore, she ought not to have taken such a hyper technical ground to file an appeal questioning the correctness of the amount awarded, as it is not a fit case to file an appeal by the Corporation. This is fit case to take judicial note of the facts and peculiar circumstances of the case and as per the Minimum Wages Act, presently, the minimum wage is Rs. 4,000/- per month, but in the instant case, what is taken is only Rs. 3,000/- per month. Even u/s 163A of M.V. Act, maximum we can take is Rs. 40,000/- per annum. Taking all these factors into consideration and the fact that, the claimants are entitled for reasonable compensation on account of the death of the deceased who was working as a Trainee Driver in the Corporation whether the petition is filed u/s 166 or 163A of M.V. Act or Workmen''s Compensation Act, cannot be taken away, we are of the view that, it is not a fit case to entertain the relief sought either by the claimants or by the Corporation.
For the foregoing reasons, these appeals filed by the claimants and by the Corporation are dismissed as devoid of merits.
The amount deposited by the Corporation shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional Tribunal, forthwith.