LAXMAMMA AND ORS. Vs. NOORULLA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the appellants directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 26th November 2012 passed in M.V.C. No. 1021/2011 on the file of the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court -II and M.A.C.T., Shimoga (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short). The Tribunal by its impugned Judgment and Award, awarded a sum of Rs. 3,79,000/ - with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation fixing 50% contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. The claimants have filed this appeal on the ground that the quantum of compensation and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement and further fixing the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased is disproportionate and the same may be re -determined and liable to be reduced by modifying the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal.

(2.) The brief facts of the case on hand are that, the appellant No. 1 is the mother, appellant No. 2 is the wife and appellant Nos. 3, 4 and 5 are children of the deceased. They have filed a claim petition under Sec. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation of Rs. 30,10,000/ - against the respondents on account of untimely death of the deceased Sri. M.K. Das in the road traffic accident that occurred on 7.1.2010 at about 3.15 p.m. contending that, when the deceased was going on his bike bearing No. KA -14/V -6348 to his land after completion of his lunch, while he was so proceeding near Beeranakere, Kittadalu Village, at that time the 1st respondent, being the driver of Krishna Bus bearing Regn. No. KA -14/D -7677 drove the said bus in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the bike of the deceased. Due to the impact, he fell down and died on the spot.

(3.) It is the further case of the appellants that, the deceased was aged about 44 years, earning more than Rs. 10,000/ - per month, hale and healthy and was the only bread earning member in the family. The entire family was depending upon the income of the deceased. Due to untimely death of the deceased, the appellants are put to great hardship, loss, inconvenience and mother has lost her bright son and suffered mental pain and agony, wife has lost her companion and children have lost love and affection, inspiration, guidance. There is total loss to the family as he was the only bread earning member in the family. Taking all these aspects into consideration, they filed claim petition under Sec. 166 of the M.V. Act against the respondents before the Tribunal.