KASHIBAI Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR NEKSRTC, GULBARGA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The unfortunate wife and children have filed the present appeal for enhancement against the Judgment and award dated: 21-06-2016 made in MVC No.265/2014 on the file of Prl. Senior Civil Judge & Member MACT Kalaburagi awarding the compensation of Rs.7,82,000/- with 6% interest per annum from the date of petition till realization.

(2.) It is the case of the claimants/wife and children that on 18-05-2013 at about 1.30 p.m., near Firozabad Darga, Farhatabad the deceased Srimanth was coming on his motor cycle from Gulbarga, at that time, KSRTC bus bearing Reg. No.KA-36-F-761 came in a rash and negligent manner dashed him due to which the wheel of the bus passed on his head and he died on the spot. Due to the untimely death, the claimants are depending upon him are facing financial problems to lead their life. The Jurisdictional police have registered a case in Crime No.72/2013 against the driver of the bus. It was further contended that, the deceased was running kirana shop, thereby he was earning Rs.15,000/- per month apart from that, deceased was working as agriculturist who had owned lands bearing survey No.106/1 measuring 14 acres 4 guntas and survey No.108/A measuring 6 acres 3 guntas of Balundagi village wherein the deceased was growing commercial crop and thereby he was getting annual income of Rs.10,00,000/-. The first claimant being the wife, and claimants No.2 to 6 are the sons and daughters of the deceased. The respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. Therefore the claimants have sought for awarding compensation of Rs.20,00,000/- from the respondents.

(3.) The respondent No.2/Divisional Controller has appeared through its counsel and has filed the objection denying the claim and contentions of the claimants. The respondent No.2 has mainly contended that the claim petition is fit to be dismissed for non joinder of necessary parties for not impleading the owner and insurer of the Honda Shine Motor cycle. The claimants have foisted a false case against the Corporation driver for claiming the compensation and that the deceased was not having valid and effective driving license on the date of the accident and the accident took place due to rash and negligent manner without following the traffic rules and therefore he himself fell down on the road and therefore, the accident occurred. The compensation sought is exorbitant. The respondents denied the age, income and occupation of the deceased and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.