SHALABAI ALIAS SHANABAI Vs. CHANDRAKANT MANIKEBAND MARDIKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DEOGONDA Bhau Patil was working as store attendant in Messrs. Ghatge Patil Industries, Uchagaon, Kolhapur in the pay scale of Rs. 55-100 with a dearness allowance of Rs. 263/. On 25-6-1980 Deogonda along with his colleague and friend Jinappa Chougule who was also working in Ghatge Patil Industries, started on bicycles from their village Herale and were proceeding towards their place of work at Uchagaon. Enroute when they arrived at Shiroli Naka they had a choice between two bridges which have been constructed over the river Panchganga. The vehicular traffic having been diverted to the new bridge, the old bridge had become decongested and the two cyclists preferred the old bridge to cross the river. Deogonda and Jinappa were not riding their bicycles in tandem but chose to do it abreast because probably they felt that there was no danger of any mechanically propelled vehicle coming on the road from behind. Unfortunately their suppositions were belied and Kishansing Parashramsing Hajeri did come with his truck from behind and dashed against Deogonda who was thrown on the ground and died after being admitted to the hospital. His friend Jinappa escaped unhurt.

(2.) ON these facts the widow and children of Deogonda filed Motor Accidents Claim No. 33 of 1980 before the Claims Tribunal at Kolhapur, which awarded Rs. 25,600/- to the petitioners on the basis that the truck driver was guilty of contributory negligence to the extent of 2/3rd while the deceased Deogonda was guilty to the extent of the remaining l/3rd. The claimants appeal.

(3.) COMING to the question of damages, the learned Member has taken a multiplier of 16 and the dependency of Rs. 200/- per month which cannot be faulted because the claimants themselves had put the dependency at the figure of Rs. 200/- per month in the claim petition. But the Tribunal has not awarded any amount on account of the expenditure incurred in the hospital and loss of consortium, though there is documentary evidence to prove that Rs. 2,000/- were expended by them in the hospital. To that we would add a sum of Rs. 5,000/- for loss of consortium which would bring us to the round total of Rs. 45,000/-.