SAROJAMMA vs MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C. & ORS.

Appellant is the claimant, being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in the judgment and award dated 26-09-2013 made in MVC No.186/2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tumkur (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short) filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

The appellant and her three children filed a claim petition contending that the husband of the first claimant and father of claimants 2 to 4 deceased Ramanna, while proceeding on the left side of the road at Manchakalkuppe bus-stop, Urdigere Hobli, Tumkur Taluk on 07-01-2012 at about 3.45 p.m., a KSRTC bus bearing Registration No. KA- 17/F-1249 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the said Ramanna, as a result of which, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries to the vital parts of the body. Immediately after the accident he was shifted to Government Hospital at Tumkur. However, during the course of treatment, he died at 9.45 p.m., on the same day. In the claim petition, it was contended that the deceased was working as a mason, earning Rs.10,000/- p.m. At the time of death, he was aged about 52 years and spent more than Rs.30,000/- towards funeral expenditure. Due to the rash and negligent driving of the KSRTC bus, the accident had occurred and sought for compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a.

The KSRTC defended the case by filing the written statement.

After trial, the Tribunal held that the accident occurred due to the actionable negligence on the part of driver of the KSRTC bus, claimants are the legal representatives of deceased Ramanna and they are entitled for compensation. Since claimants 2 to 4 are married daughters of deceased Ramanna, they are not entitled to receive any compensation. With regard to quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal taking into consideration income of the deceased as Rs.4,500/- p.m., deducting 50% towards his personal expenditure and applying the multiplier 11, since the deceased was aged about 52 years as on the date of death, awarded a sum of Rs.2,97,000/- towards loss of dependency and a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards conventional heads. In all, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.3,22,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the wife

of the deceased Ramanna being the first claimant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

I have heard Sri.Patel D Karegowda, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri.F.S.Dabali, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent. Perused the judgment and award and oral and documentary evidence.

The only dispute to be decided in this appeal is with regard to quantum of compensation.

The main contention of the appellant is that the accident occurred in the year 2012, the deceased was working as a mason and earning Rs.10,000/- p.m., whereas the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- p.m., which is on the lower side. Even in the absence of any documents regarding proof of income, the Tribunal ought to have reckoned the reasonable income while awarding compensation. Even the income of daily wage employees working in various Government Departments and the agricultural coolies would be more than Rs.6,500/- p.m., during the relevant period. Hence, it would meet the ends of justice, if a sum of Rs.6,500/- is considered as monthly income of the deceased. Further, the deceased was aged about 52 years as on the date of death; left behind his wife and three married daughters. The Tribunal had deducted 50% towards his personal expenditure, which is contrary to law. The Hon''ble Supreme Court in a judgment reported in 2009(6) SCC 121 in the case of SARLA VERMA AND OTHERS v/s DELHI TRNSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER, at paragraph 14 of the judgment has held that in case of a married person, 1/3rd has to be deducted towards his personal expenditure. Hence, taking the income of the deceased at Rs.6,500/- p.m. and Rs.78,000/- p.a., deducting 1/3rd towards his personal expenditure and applying the multiplier 11, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.5,72,000/- towards loss of dependency as against Rs.2,97,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further, the wife has lost the company of her husband at the age of 42 years, hence she is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards loss of consortium and a sum of Rs.45,000/- towards conventional heads. In all, the claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.6,67,000/- as against Rs.3,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. Further, the exgratia amount paid by the KSRTC has to be deducted out of the compensation amount. Accordingly, I pass the following: The appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award dated 26-09-2013 made in MVC No.186/2012 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore is modified. The claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.6,67,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., as against a sum of Rs.3,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

The KSRTC is at liberty to deduct a sum of Rs.50,000/- paid towards exgratia, while depositing the compensation amount.

The claimant is not entitled to interest for the delayed period of 657 days in filing the appeal as per the order dated 9.3.2017.