- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8710/2015 (MV-D) C/w MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7869/2015 (MV-D) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1399/2017 (MV-I) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1400/2017 (MV-I) MFA CROSS OBJECTION NO.90/2018 (MV-I) MFA NO. 8710/2015: BETWEEN: THE MANAGER APSRTC VC & MD KANIGIRI, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH REP. BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR ANDHRA PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION MUSHIRABAD, HYDERABAD …APPELLANT (BY SRI D VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT PRAMILA W/O LATE A.M.VENKATACHALAPATHI AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 2. SMT.PUSHPA M.V. D/O LATE A.M.VENKATACHALAPATHI W/O SRI G.DEVARAJ AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS 3. SMT.SUDHA M.V. D/O LATE A.M.VENKATACHALAPATHI Digitally signed by K S RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 W/O SRI RAMESH AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 4. SMT.SWETHA M.V. D/O LATE A.M.VENKATACHALAPATHI W/O SRI NARAYANA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS A1 TO A4 ARE R/AT NO.343 KAVERI ROAD, 4TH CROSS UDAYANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 016 5. SRI R.RAMESH S/O SRI RAMANNA MAJOR R/AT NO.497/1, KOTE HOSAKOTE TOWN BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 6. M/S. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. MOTOR CLAIMS HUB REP. BY ITS MANAGER R/AT NO.144, 2ND FLOOR SHUBHARAM COMPLEX M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI N.GOPAL KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; SRI O MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R6; R5 SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.08.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.1389/14 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE AND XXIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, BENGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.25,06,350/- WITH INTEREST AT 8% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT. MFA NO.7869/2015: BETWEEN: NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., MOTOR CLAIMS HUB REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.144, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, M G ROAD BANGALORE - 560 001 BY IT’S MANAGER …APPELLANT (BY SRI O.MAHESH, ADVOCATE) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 AND: 1. PRAMILA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS W/O A M VENKATACHALAPATHI 2. PUSHPA M V AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS D/O A M VENKATACHALAPATHI W/O G DEVARAJ 3. SUDHA M V AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS D/O A M VENKATACHALAPATHI W/O RAMESH 4. SWETHA M V AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS D/O A M VENKATACHALAPATHI W/O NARAYANASWAMY R1 TO R4 ARE R/AT NO.343, KAVERI ROAD 4TH CROSS, UDAYANAGAR BANGALORE - 560 016 5. THE MANAGER APSRTC, VC & MD, KANIGIRI PRAKASHAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH - 1 6. SRI R RAMESH MAJOR S/O RAMANNA R/AT NO.497/1, KOTE HOSASKOTE TOWN – 562 114 BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GOPALAKRISHNA N, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; SRI D.VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R5; R6 SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.08.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.1389/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE & XXIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BANGALORE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.25,06,350/- WITH INTEREST @ 8% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 MFA NO.1399/2017: BETWEEN: THE MANAGER APSRTC VC & MD KANIGIRI, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR A.P.S.R.T.C, MUSHIRABAD HYDERABAD …APPELLANT (BY SRI D.VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI G DEVARAJA S/O K V GOPALAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT KADAGATTUR VILLAGE KYALANUR POST, KOLAR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT 2. SRI R RAMESH S/O RAMANNA MAJOR R/AT NO.497/1 KOTE, HOSKOTE TOWN BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT 3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. MOTOR CLAIMS HUB NO.144, 2ND FLOOR SHUBHARAM COMPLEX M G ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GOPAL KRISHNA N, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI JANARDHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD: 13.07.2023) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.08.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.157/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.3,15,700/- WITH INTEREST AT 8% PER ANNUM INTEREST FROM DATE OF PETITION TILL DATE OF DEPOSIT. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 MFA NO.1400/2017: BETWEEN: THE MANAGER APSRTC VC & MD KANIGIRI, PRAKASHAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR A.P.S.R.T.C, MUSHIRABAD HYDERABAD …APPELLANT (BY SRI D VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI K S CHANDRASHEKAR S/O SRINIVASAPPA AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS R/AT KADAGATTUR VILLAGE KYALANUR POST, KOLAR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT 2. SRI R RAMESH S/O RAMANNA MAJOR R/AT NO.497/1 KOTE, HOSKOTE TOWN BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT 3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. MOTOR CLAIMS HUB NO.144, 2ND FLOOR SHUBHARAM COMPLEX M G ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 …RESPONDENTS BY SRI GOPAL KRISHNA N, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI O MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R2 SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.08.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.158/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.16,28,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 8% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 MFA CROB. NO. 90/2018: BETWEEN: SRI K S CHANDRASHEKAR S/O SRINIVASAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT KADAGATTUR VILLAGE KYALANUR POST KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT ...CROSS OBJECTOR (BY SRI GOPAL KRISHNA N, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGER APSRTC VC & MD KANIGIRI PRAKASHAM DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH 2. R RAMESH S/O RAMANNA MAJOR R/AT NO.497/1 KOTE, HOSKOTE TOWN BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT 3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MOTOR CLAIMS HUB NO.144, 2ND FLOOR SHUBHARAM COMPLEX M G ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY ITS MANAGER ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI D VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI O.MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED 02.02.2023) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLI RULE 22(1) OF CPC READ WITH SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.08.2016 PASSED ON MVC NO.158/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 THESE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS AND MFA CROSS OBJECTION COMING ON FOR FURTHER DICTATION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL) Claim petitions arise out of accident which occurred on 08.02.2014. Therefore, all the matters are taken up for disposal by this common judgment. Particulars of the appeals, corresponding claim petitions and the appellants are set out in the table below: Sl. No. MVC No. Claimant Amount of compensation Claimed (in Rs.) Awarded by Tribunal (in Rs.) Case Nos. Appeals preferred by 1 1389/2014 XXI ACMM & XXIII ASCJ, Bangalore Smt.Pramila & others 50,00,000/- 25,06,350/- MFA No.8710/2015 APSRTC 2 1389/2014 XXI ACMM & XXXIII ASCJ, Bangalore Smt.Pramila & others 50,00,000/- 25,06,350/- MFA No.7869/2015 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Insurer of van 3 157/2014 VIII AD & SJ Bangalore Rural District G.Devaraja 15,00,000/- 3,15,700/- MFA No.1399/2017 APSRTC 4 158/2014 VIII AD & SJ, Bangalore Rural District K.S.Chandrashekar 25,00,000/- 16,28,000/- MFA No.1400/2017 APSRTC 5 158/2014 VIII AD & SJ, Bangalore Rural District K.S.Chandrashekar 25,00,000/- 16,28,000/- MFA Crob.No. 90/2018 K.S.Chandrashekar 2. On 08.02.2014 at 11.00 p.m. when claimants in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 along with A.M.Venkatachalapathi were proceeding in Maruthi van bearing Registration No.KA-53-M-6023 near Alambagiri Cross at - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 Kadapa Bangalore Road, APSRTC bus bearing Registration No.AP-29-Z-1418 hit Maruthi van. In the accident, the claimants in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 suffered injuries and A.M.Venkatachalapathi succumbed to the injuries at the spot. At the time of the accident, APSRTC was registered owner of bus, Ramesh and National Insurance Company Ltd. were the registered owner and insurer of van bearing Registration No.KA-53-M-6023. 3. Regarding the accident, on the complaint of one G.Ashok, Chintamani Rural Police registered first information report in Crime No.50/2014 against the driver of APSRTC bus. On investigation, said police filed charge sheet against the driver of the aforesaid APSRTC bus for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A of IPC. 4. Injured claimants filed M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 before VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- and Rs.25,00,000/- respectively and legal representatives of deceased A.M.Venkatachalapathi filed M.V.C.No.1389/2014 before XXI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and XXIII Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bengaluru - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- from the respondents. 5. In M.V.C.No.1389/2014, legal representatives of deceased A.M.Venkatachalapathi contended that deceased A.M.Venkatachalapathi was serving as Special Reserve Head Constable earning Rs.35,000/- per month and they were completely dependent on his income. They further contended that due to accidental death of Venkatachalapathi, they have suffered damages and APSRTC is liable to compensate the same. 6. Claimants in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 contended that in the accident, they suffered grievous injuries and permanent physical disability, they have suffered loss of future earnings, therefore respondents are liable to compensate the same. 7. In all the cases, APSRTC contested the petitions denying actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the bus. APSRTC contended that accident occurred solely due to actionable negligence on the part of driver of van. It further denied age, occupation, income of the deceased, dependency of the claimants, injuries and permanent physical disability - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 suffered by the claimants in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014. Thus sought dismissal of the claim petitions. 8. Insurer of Maruthi van/National Insurance Company Ltd. contended that accident occurred solely due to actionable negligence on the part of driver of APSRTC and the police on investigation have filed charge sheet against the driver of APSRTC bus. It further denied the age, occupation, dependency of the claimants, injuries suffered by the claimants in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014. Thus sought dismissal of the petitions. 9. Owner of Maruthi van in all these cases did not contest the petitions. 10. The Tribunal in M.V.C.No.1389/2014 on recording the evidence of the parties and on hearing them held that the accident occurred due to contributory negligence on the part of driver of Maruthi van and APSRTC Bus in the ratio of 50% each and awarded compensation of Rs.25,06,350/- with interest at 8% per annum payable by APSRTC and Insurer of Maruthi van equally. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 11. In M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 the Tribunal relying on the evidence of the parties held that the accident occurred solely due to actionable negligence on the part of driver of APSRTC bus. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.3,15,700/- and Rs.16,28,000/- in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 respectively with interest at 8% per annum payable by APSRTC. 12. Challenging the findings regarding negligence as well as quantum, APSRTC and insurer of van have preferred the above said appeals as set out in the table above. Questioning adequacy of compensation, claimant in M.V.C.No.158/2014 has filed cross objection in M.F.A.Crob.No.90/2018. Submissions of Sri D.Vijaya Kumar, learned Counsel for APSRTC: 13. The evidence on record shows that APSRTC bus was being driven slowly and cautiously and it was the driver of Maruthi van bearing Registration No.KA-53-M-6023 who drove the said vehicle in rash and negligent manner at high speed. When the driver of Maruthi van tried to overtake Scorpio Car which was ahead of it, the van hit Scorpio car and consequently turtled and rolled towards the right side of the road in front of - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 APSRTC bus, which was coming from other side. On witnessing the incident, the driver of APSRTC stopped the said bus. However, as the bus was heavy vehicle, the same is falsely implicated in the case to get compensation. The charge sheet was outcome of collusion between claimants and the police and compensation awarded in all the cases is on the higher side. Submissions of Sri O.Mahesh, learned Counsel for Insurer of Maruthi van bearing Registration No.KA-53-M-6023: 14. The evidence on record clearly shows that the accident occurred solely due to rash and negligent driving of APSRTC bus by its driver. On investigation, charge sheet was filed against the said driver. The claimants in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 were injured eyewitnesses. The claimants in those cases deposed that the accident occurred due to actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the bus. The Tribunal committed error in overlooking charge sheet and other evidence on record and imputing 50% negligence to the driver of the van in M.V.C.No.1389/2014. Award in M.V.C.No.1389/2014 against the insurer of the van bearing Registration No.KA-53-M-6023 is liable to be set aside and the appeals of APSRTC pertaining to M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 are liable to be - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 dismissed. Alternatively the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side. Submissions of Sri N.Gopala Krishna, learned Counsel for the claimants: 15. The charge sheet was filed against the driver of APSRTC bus. So far as negligence in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 the driver of APSRTC bus was not examined. Compensation awarded in M.V.C.No.1389/2014 and M.V.C.No.157/2014 is just one. The compensation awarded in M.V.C.No.158/2014 is inadequate and on the lower side, therefore the same needs to be enhanced. 16. On hearing the parties and on examining the records, the questions that arise for consideration of the Court are: (i) Whether the findings of Tribunal that the accident in question involved APSRTC bus bearing Registration No.AP-29-Z-1418 and Maruti van bearing Registration No.KA-53-M- 6023 regarding actionable negligence are sustainable? (ii) Whether compensation awarded in M.V.C.No.1389/2014 is just and fair one? - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 (iii) Whether compensation awarded in M.V.C.No.157/2014 is just and fair one? (iv) Whether compensation awarded in M.V.C.No.158/2014 is just and fair one? Analysis Reg. Negligence: 17. There is no dispute that on 08.02.2014 at 11.00 p.m. when Venkatachalapathi and the claimants in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 were traveling in van bearing Registration No.KA-53-M-6023 near Alambagiri Cross, Kadapa Bangalore Road, accident took place and in that accident, Venkatachalapathi died and the claimants in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 suffered injuries. It is also not in dispute that regarding the accident, one G.Ashok, relative of Venkatachalapathi filed the complaint before Chintamani Rural Police, on that basis, first information report in Crime No.50/2014 was registered against the driver of APSRTC bus. In the complaint, it was alleged that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of APSRTC bus driver. On investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the driver of APSRTC. - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 18. It is contended before this Court that APSRTC bus driver was not responsible for the accident and the said bus was not involved in the accident. It was contended that the driver of the van bearing Registration No.KA-53-M-6023 tried to overtake Scorpio Car, so van lost control, turtled and rolled towards the right side of the road, on witnessing on coming van, driver of APSRTC bus stopped the same. Thus he was not responsible for the accident and the bus was not involved in the accident. The first information report produced in the case shows that the complaint was filed on 09.02.2014 at 2.30 hours. If APSRTC bus driver was eyewitness should have filed the complaint, he would have been shown as witness in the charge sheet or he would have given statement before the police. It is no doubt true that charge sheet is not conclusive proof, but it has some presumptive value in view of Section 114(e) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Therefore the burden of rebutting the said presumption was on APSRTC. 19. When the claimants in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 injured eyewitnesses deposed that the accident occurred due to actionable negligence on the part of driver of APSRTC bus he should have been examined in those - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 cases. Bus driver was examined only in M.V.C.No.1389/2014. In the entire crime scene, alleged Scorpio vehicle was not found. Driver of APSRTC bus of examined as RW.1 in M.V.C.No.1389/2014. Though in the chief examination he claimed that he went to the jurisdictional police and reported the accident, no such report/complaint is forthcoming. In the cross-examination, he claimed that though he tried to file the complaint, the police did not register the same and he informed the same to his department. But, he says that he did not inform the same to the Higher Officers and he was not able to say what was the registered number of the alleged Scorpio car. He admits that his bus was seized. The photographs of the same were said to have been taken at the spot. As per Ex.P3/IMV report in M.V.C.No.1389/2014, the bus had damages on its right side bumper, right head lamp assembly and indicator, right side body shape and right side corner. These damages were not explained. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the Tribunal in M.V.C.No.157/2014 and M.V.C.No.158/2014 was just in holding that the accident occurred solely due to actionable negligence on the part of driver of APSRTC bus and the Tribunal in M.V.C.No.1389/2014 was in error in attributing 50% negligence to the driver of the - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 van. Therefore the finding in M.V.C.No.1389/2014 to that extent has to be set aside. Reg. Compensation in M.V.C.No.1389/2014: (M.F.A. No.8710/2015 & M.F.A.No.7869/2015) 20. The Tribunal by the impugned award has awarded compensation of Rs.25,06,350/- along with interest at 8% per annum payable by APSRTC and insurer of Maruthi van. In this case, the claimants contended that the deceased Venkatachalapathi was working as Special Reserve Head Constable earning Rs.35,000/- per month and he was aged 57 years. As per school certificate/Ex.P.10, Venkatachalapathi was born 25.05.1956. The accident took place on 08.02.2014. Therefore as on the date of the accident, he was aged 58 years. 21. As per Exs.P8 and P9 at the time of the accident, deceased was working as Special Reserve Head Constable and his gross salary for the month of January 2014 was Rs.27,200/-. Out of that uniform allowance and medical allowance, which were not regular income cannot be considered. Therefore his salary has to be taken as Rs.27,000/- per month. - 18 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 22. As deceased was permanently employed, having regard to his age and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Company Ltd., v. Pranay Sethi1, 15% has to be superadded to his income by way of future prospects. Therefore his monthly income would be Rs.27,000/- + 15% of Rs.27,000/- = Rs.31,050/-. Thus his annual income comes to Rs.31,050/- x 12 =Rs.3,72,600/-. On deducting Rs.2,400/- towards professional tax, his annual income would be Rs.3,72,600/- - Rs.2,400/- = Rs.3,70,200/-. 23. As per Finance Act, 2014, income above Rs.2,00,000/- was taxable and applicable tax rate was 10%. Therefore Rs.17,020/- has to be deducted from his income towards income tax. (Rs.3,70,200/- - Rs.2,00,000/- = 1,70,200 x 10% =17,020/-). Therefore his annual income would be Rs.3,70,200/- - Rs.17,020= Rs.3,53,180/- 24. It is contended that claimant Nos.2 to 4 being married daughters, 50% has to be deducted from the income of the deceased for his personal expenses. Admittedly, deceased was married to claimant No.1. In view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma v. Delhi Transport 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 - 19 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 Corporation2, 50% has to be deducted only in case of unmarried victims. In the present case, 1/3rd has to be deducted for personal expenses of the deceased. Thus his contribution to the family comes to Rs.3,53,180/- x 2/3 = Rs.2,35,453/-. 25. It is the contention of Sri D.Vijaya Kumar, learned Counsel for APSRTC that the deceased Venkatachalapathi was left with only three years of service and therefore split multiplier has to be applied. In submitting that he is oblivious of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in R.Valli v. Tamilnadu State Road Transport Corporation3 wherein relying on its earlier judgments in Sarla verma’s case and Pranay Sethi’s case it was held as follows: “11. Thus, we find that the method of determination of compensation applying two multipliers is clearly erroneous and run counter to the judgment of this Court in Pranay Sethi, affirming the judgment in Sarla Verma. Since the deceased was 54 years of age on the date of incident, therefore, the suitable multiplier would be 11 as per the judgment of this Court in Sarla Verma approved by this Court in Pranay Sethi.” (Emphasis supplied) 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 AIR 2022 SC 1096 - 20 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 26. Therefore in the light of the above judgment, said submission deserves no merit. For the age of the deceased, applicable multiplier is 9. Therefore compensation payable on the head of loss of dependency comes to Rs.2,35,453/- x 9 = Rs.21,19,077/-. 27. As per the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi’s case referred to supra and Magma General Insurance Company Ltd., v. Nanu Ram4 the claimants are entitled to compensation on the head of spousal and parental consortium at Rs.40,000/- with escalation of 10% which comes to Rs.44,000/- x 4= Rs.1,76,000/-. 28. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi’s case referred to supra, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.15,000/- on the head of loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- for funeral expenses and transportation with escalation at 10%. Therefore the just compensation payable is as follows: Sl. No. Particulars Compensation awarded in Rs. 1. Loss of dependency 21,19,077/- 2. Loss of consortium 1,76,000/- 3. Loss of estate 16,500/- 4. Funeral expenses & transportation charges 16,500/- Total 23,28,077/- 4 (2018) 18 SCC 130 - 21 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 29. Claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.23,28,077/- as against Rs.25,06,350/- awarded by the Tribunal. The said compensation shall be payable by APRSTC with interest at 6% per annum. Therefore M.F.A.No.8710/2015 deserves to be allowed in part and M.F.A.No.7869/2015 has to be allowed. Reg. Compensation in M.V.C.No.157/2014: (M.F.A.No.1399/2017) 30. To prove the injuries suffered, the claimant examined himself as PW.1 and the doctor as PW.3. Their evidence show that the claimant was treated as an inpatient in Hosmat Hospital for three days and in Rajiv Gandhi Hospital for ten days between 14.02.2014 to 24.02.2014. He had suffered the following injuries: (i) Grade III right AC joint dislocation, (ii) Multiple rib fracture on right with right scapula fracture with surgical emphysema pneumomediastinum, (iii) Contusion posterior and lateral segment of right lower lobe, (iv) Bilateral Haemothorax. 31. PW.3 assessed the permanent physical disability to the whole body at 13%. The Tribunal without assigning just - 22 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 reasons reduced it to 12%. The Tribunal considered the income of the claimant at `8,000/- pm., his age as 41 years and applied 14 multiplier. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.3,15,700/- with interest at 8% pa., on different heads as follows: Sl. No. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1 Pain and sufferings 35,000.00 2 Medical expenses 45,400.00 3 Loss of earning during laid up period 24,000.00 4 Loss of future income on account of permanent disability 1,61,300.00 5 Loss of amenities and future unhappiness 20,000.00 6 Attendant, diet, conveyance and other charges 10,000.00 7 Future medical expenses 20,000.00 Total 3,15,700.00 32. Considering the nature of injuries and the period of treatment, the compensation awarded on the head of pain and suffering, medical expenses, loss of earning during laid up period, loss of future income on account of permanent disability, loss of amenities and attendant, diet, conveyance and other charges the compensation awarded cannot be said to be excessive by any stretch of imagination. - 23 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 33. PW.3 deposed that the claimant needs Rs.90,000/- for reconstruction of acromioclavicular joint to improve the functioning of the said limb. The Tribunal awarded Rs.20,000/- under the said head, therefore that also cannot be said to be on the higher side. On assessment of the evidence, this Court does not find any ground to hold that the compensation awarded in this case to the claimant is on the higher side. Therefore, there is no merit in M.F.A.No.1399/2017. 34. So far as the liability is concerned, already in the connected matter it is held that the accident occurred solely due to the negligence of the driver of the APSRTC bus. On that count also, the said appeal does not deserve any merit. Reg. Compensation in MVC No.158/2014: (M.F.A.No.1400/2017 & M.F.A.Crob.No.90/2018) 35. The Tribunal by the impugned award has awarded compensation of Rs.16,28,000/- with interest at 8% per annum payable by APSRTC. In this case, the evidence of PW.2 and the doctor/PW.3 shows that the claimant had suffered the following injuries: (i) Eye left parietal contusion with mild edema, (ii) D12 burst fracture with paraplegia, (iii) Bilateral haemothorax. - 24 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 36. The evidence of PWs.2 and 3 and Exs.P18 and P19 (discharges summaries), Exs.P29 and P30 (out patient record and inpatient record) show that the claimant was treated as inpatient in Hosmat Hospital between 10.02.2014 and 21.02.2014 and in MVJ Hospital between 06.02.2015 and 11.02.2015. The evidence of PW.3 shows that the claimant was wheelchair-bound. He had sustained fracture of fibula and patella. PW.3 further deposed that the claimant had no bladder and bowel control. His evidence further shows that the claimant needed physiotherapy, daily dressing and care for bed sores and catheter. He assessed permanent physical disability of the claimant at 95% to the whole body. In his cross- examination except suggesting that he was not a neurosurgeon, his competence to assess the disability was not discredited. 37. At the time of accident, the claimant was aged 25 years and claimed to be an agriculturist. He has produced RTCs in the name of his father. Considering his age, occupation and the evidence of PW.3, the Tribunal ought to have assigned acceptable reasons, if any, that too to deviate from the evidence of PW.3 in reducing the permanent physical - 25 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 and functional disability, which is not done. Therefore, that finding of the Tribunal does not sustain. 38. In the connected matter, the notional income for the said period is already considered as Rs.8,000/- and the same has to be considered in this case also. The applicable multiplier is 18. Future prospects at 40% has to be awarded in addition to the notional income of the claimant. Therefore, his monthly income would be Rs.11,200/- (Rs.8,000/-x40%). Therefore, the compensation payable on the head of loss of future earnings is Rs.22,98,240/- (Rs.11,200/-x 12 x18 x 95/100). 39. Considering the medical evidence and the other material on record, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal needs to be enhanced to Rs.1,50,000/- on the head of pain and sufferings. Since the medical expenses awarded at Rs.3,06,200/- is based on the evidence, that needs to be maintained. Since 95% permanent physical disability is considered and future prospects is already awarded, the question of again awarding compensation on the head of loss of income during laid up period does not survive. - 26 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 40. The claimant has lost control over his body below waist. The evidence of doctor shows that the claimant has lost bladder and bowel control. Therefore, he was on catheter. Hence, awarding Rs.3,00,000/- on the head of loss of amenities would be just and proper. 41. The claimant was hospitalized for about 17 days. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- on the head of attendant, diet, conveyance and other charges which needs to be enhanced to Rs.20,000/-. The evidence on record shows that the claimant needs an attendant in future also, as he suffered paraplegia of his body below his waist and needs wheelchair assistance. Therefore, towards the future attendant charges, medical expenses and cost of wheelchair awarding a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- would be just and proper. 42. Due to his permanent physical disability and condition, the claimant has suffered loss of marriage prospects and the compensation is not awarded on that head. In similar circumstances, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Kajal v. Jagdish Chand5 and Ayush v. Reliance General Insurance 5 (2020) 4 SCC 413 - 27 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 Co.6, has awarded Rs.3,00,000/- on the head of loss of marriage prospects. The same needs to be awarded in this case also. Therefore, the just compensation to be awarded in this case is as follows: Sl. No Particulars Amount in Rs. 1 Pain and sufferings 1,50,000.00 2 Medical expenses 3,06,200.00 3 Loss of future income on account of permanent disability 22,98,240.00 4 Loss of amenities and future unhappiness 3,00,000.00 5 Attendant, diet, conveyance and other charges 20,000.00 6 Future attendant charges & wheel chair 5,00,000.00 7 Loss of marriage prospects 3,00,000.00 Total 38,74,440.00 43. Claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.22,46,440/- (Rs.38,74,440/- - Rs.16,28,000/-) rounded off to Rs.22,47,000/-. APSRTC is liable to pay the said compensation. Therefore, M.F.A.Crob.No.90/2018 deserves to be allowed in part. 44. In all these cases, the Tribunal has awarded interest at 8% p.a. APSRTC is service oriented organization and there are no special circumstances to award interest at 8% p.a. Hence, the appeals filed by APSRTC deserve to be allowed 6 (2022) 7 SCC 738 - 28 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 only to that extent. For the aforesaid reasons, the Court passes the following: ORDER (i) M.F.A.No.1400/2017 & M.F.A.No.1399/2017 are partly allowed. (ii) M.F.A.No.7869/2015 is allowed; (iii) M.F.A.No.8710/2015 and M.F.A.Crob.No.90/2018 are partly allowed; (iv) Award in M.V.C.No.1389/2014 is modified as follows: (a) Petition against Owner/respondent No.2 and National Insurance Company Ltd./respondent No.3 is dismissed; (b) Petition against APSRTC/respondent No.1 is allowed in part; (c) The claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.23,28,077/- with interest thereon at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization; (d) Respondent No.1 - APSRTC shall deposit the said amount before the Tribunal on adjusting the amount already deposited, if any, within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order; - 29 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 (e) The order of the Tribunal with regard to apportionment and investment is maintained. (v) Award in M.V.C.No.157/2014 is modified as follows: (a) The claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.3,15,700/- with interest thereon at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization; (b) Respondent No.1 - APSRTC shall deposit the said amount before the Tribunal on adjusting the amount already deposited, if any, within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order; (c) On such deposit, the Tribunal shall release the same digitally to the claimant on furnishing the required documents. (vi) Award in M.V.C.No.158/2014 is modified as follows: (a) The claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.38,74,440/- with interest thereon at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realisation; (b) Respondent No.1 - APSRTC shall deposit the said amount before the Tribunal on adjusting the amount already deposited, if any, within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order; - 30 - NC: 2025:KHC:1674-DB MFA No.8710/2015 C/w MFA No.7869/2015 MFA No.1399/2017, MFA No.1400/2017 & MFA CROB.No.90/2018 (c) On such deposit, the Tribunal shall invest 50% of the award amount in FD in any nationalized/scheduled Bank of the choice of the claimant for a period of 5 years and the balance shall be released to him digitally on furnishing the required documents. (vii) The amount in deposit, if any, and the trial Court records shall be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. Sd/- (K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE KSR,ND List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40