01Facts
On 10 February 2018, a KSRTC bus allegedly driven rashly and negligently collided with a motorcycle, causing the death of 75-year-old V. Koteshwara Rao.
pp. 2–5His wife, the sole surviving dependent, claimed compensation, alleging that he was an agriculturist earning ₹50,000 per month.
pp. 2–5The Tribunal awarded ₹3,10,000, assessing loss of dependency at ₹2,40,000 and awarding amounts for funeral expenses, loss of estate and consortium.
pp. 7–8The wife appealed, seeking enhancement.
pp. 7–802Issues
i.1. Whether the appellant was entitled to enhancement of compensation and, if so, to what amount.
¶ 11ii.2. What order should follow from the determination of the compensation issue.
¶ 1103Law Applied
The appeal was brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act.
p. 1For assessing dependency, the Court applied the Karnataka Legal Services Authority’s notional-income guidelines, taking the 2018 monthly income as ₹11,750.
¶ 13It relied on Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport Corporation, 2009 ACJ 1298, for the applicable multiplier of 5 for a deceased aged 75.
¶ 13It also relied on Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram, 2018 ACJ 2782, and National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680, in awarding consortium and applying a 10% increase to the conventional heads of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses.
¶ 14–15Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173
04Reasoning
The deceased’s claimed income of ₹50,000 per month was unsupported by documentary evidence, so the Court used the guideline income of ₹11,750 per month.
¶ 13–17As the deceased was 75, it made no addition for future prospects and applied a multiplier of 5.
¶ 13–17Because his wife was his only dependent, the Court upheld the 50% deduction for personal expenses.
¶ 13–17This produced dependency compensation of ₹3,52,500.
¶ 13–17Applying a 10% increase to the conventional awards, the Court allowed ₹44,000 for consortium and ₹16,500 each for loss of estate and funeral expenses, bringing total compensation to ₹4,29,500.
¶ 13–1705Holding
The Court answered the enhancement issue in the affirmative and partly allowed the appeal.
¶ 17–18It modified the award to grant total compensation of ₹4,29,500, compared with the Tribunal’s ₹3,10,000, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization.
¶ 17–18 · p. 10Respondent No. 2 was directed to deposit the compensation with accrued interest within eight weeks of receiving the certified judgment; no order as to costs was made.
¶ 17–18 · p. 10Original Court PDF
SMT. V JANSI W/O LATE V KOTESHWARA RAOvsSRI. LAL PATEL INGANKAL S/O SAHIB PATEL
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
