Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corp. vs Maya, Vijaya lakshmi Pillai and Kum. Sindhu

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal filed by the Corporation is directed against the judgment and award dated 22.01.2005 passed in MVC No. 3467/2002 on the file of the XVII Additional Judge & MACT, Court of Small Causes, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore (SCCH-20) (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal'' for brevity). The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award awarded a sum of Rs. 13,80,000/- with 6% interest from the date of petition till the date of realisation as against the claim of the claimants for Rs. 30,00,000/- on account of the death of the deceased. Sri Biju T.S. in a road traffic accident. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the Corporation felt necessary to present this appeal on the ground that the compensation awarded is on the higher side and needs to be reduced.

Brief facts of the case are:

Claimant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are respectively the wife, mother and sister of the deceased. That on, 12.06.2002 at about 8.00 p.m., when the deceased was riding his motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-04-X-7883 on Residency road and reached near Asharvadam Circle, at that time & BMTC Bus bearing registration No. AF 318 came from behind with high speed, in rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle.As a result of the same, the deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries on the vital parts of his body. He was shifted to Hosmat Hospital and the deceased succumbed to the injuries. The deceased was aged about 24 years and was working as a clerk in ICICI Bank, earning Rs. 10,300/- p.m. He was the only bread earner and financial support to the family, On account of untimely death of the deceased, the family is lacing severe financial distress. Therefore, the claimants were constrained to file a claim petition u/s 166 of M.V. Act claiming compensation against the Appellant. The said claim petition filed by the claimants came up for consideration before the Tribunal, and the Tribunal in turn, after perusal of the oral and documentary evidence on the file, allowed the claim petition in part awarding a sum of Rs. 13,80,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a. Being dissatisfied with the compensation, the Appellant Corporation has presented this appeal seeking modification by reducing the compensation.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant Corporation at the outset contended that due to rash and negligent driving by the deceased, accident has occurred and the Tribunal without taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence on record and negligence on the part of the deceased, has awarded the compensation to claimants. Further, she submitted that, the compensation awarded to the wife is not justifiable, on the ground that the wife of the deceased has re-married and is not entitled to any compensation and the multiplier applicable is liable to be based on the age of the mother and not of the age of wife. The father of the deceased also died during the pendency of the claim petition. Therefore, the learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified and compensation by reducing the compensation.

The learned Counsel for the Respondents/claimants inter-alia substantiated that the compensation awarded towards loss of dependency, loss of estate and other heads is just and reasonable, in as much as the documents prove beyond reasonable doubt The rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle belonging to the Appellant Corporation and the Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation after appreciating oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, there is no substantial ground urged by the Appellant Corporation and hence, prays that the appeal is liable to be dismissed.

We have heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant and the learned Counsel for the Respondents for considerable length of time.

After critical evaluation of the oral anddocumentary evidence and other relevant material available on file including the impugned judgment and award, we do not find any material irregularity or miscarriage of justice. The Tribunal has rightlyassessed the net income of the deceased, after deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of thedeceased and considering the dependants who are wife, mother and sister, has awarded just and reasonable compensation.

The Tribunal considering the relevant aspect that the wife of the deceased has re-married and also the father of the deceased expired during pendency of the petition, has given specific finding of fact.Therefore, the said finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal, does not call for any interference by this Court and there is no force in the submission of the learned Counsel for the Appellant. Therefore, we are of the view that the Tribunal has rightly accepted and considered the material on record and allowed the same in part and awarded just and reasonable compensation.

In the course of the submission, learned Counsel for the Appellant Corporation contended that there is contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. The said contention also cannot be accepted for the reason that the Tribunal after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on the file, specifically EXE.P.1 to P.5, which are crystal clear and coupled with eye witness of PW.2 and the witness of PW.1, has recorded the finding of the feet that due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle belonging to the Appellant Corporation, the accident has occurred. The said finding recorded is just and proper and interference is uncalled for. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the instant appeal stands dismissed.

The statutory amount deposited by the Corporation shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional Tribunal forthwith.

Office to draw the award accordingly.