BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORP. versus PADMA AND ORS.

Citation: [2009] 3 S.C.R. 464 · Decided: 25-02-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 3 S.C.R. 464 
~ t 
A 
BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORP. 
v. 
PADMA AND ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 1251 of 2009) 
B 
FEBRUARY 25, 2009 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM 
>-
SHARMA, JJ.] 
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - s.166 - Fatal accident -
c Deceased aged 53 years was permanent employee in the 
State Government and drawing a salary of Rs.12,2391- with 
other benefits.of service- Claim for compensation- On facts, 
held: Appropriate multiplier would be 8 - On that basis loss 
of dependency comes to Rs. 7.83 lacs -Compensation fixed 
.. 
• 
0 at Rs8.53 lacs with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date 
of the claim. 
The husband of respondent no.1 was hit by a bus 
belonging to Appellant Corporation and consequently 
E died. At the time of the incident, the deceased was about 
53 years of age and was a permanent employee in the 
Ji 
State Government drawing a salary of Rs.12,239/- per 
• 
month with other benefits of service. The Motor Accident 
Claims Tribunal awarded compensation of about Rs.11 
.. 
.. 
F 
lakhs after adopting a multiplier of 12. The order was 
affirmed by the High Court. Hence the present appeal. 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: The deceased was aged about 53 years on 
G the date of accident. That being so the appropriate 
" 
multiplier would be 8. On that basis loss of dependency 
comes to Rs.7,83,296/-. The compensation is fixed at Rs. 
8,53,296/-. The amount shall carry interest at the rate of 
6% p.a. from the date of the claim. [Para 7] [466-H; 467-
H A-B] 
464 
BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORP. v. 
465 
-I 
PADMA AND ORS. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
A 
1251 of 2009. 
From the Judgment/Order dated 29.10.2007 of the High 
Court of Karnataka at Bangalore passed in Miscellaneous 
First Appeal No. 2536/2002(MV). 
B 
S.N. Bhat for the Appellant. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Leave granted. 
c 
2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division 
bench of the Karnataka High Court dismissing the appeal filed 
' 
under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short 
.. 
the 'Act'). The Award made by the Motor Accidents Claims 
Tribunal, Bangalore (in short the 'MACT') was questioned in 
D 
the appeal. MACT by its Award dated 16.2.2002 had awarded 
a sum of Rs.11,04,032/- as compensation. 
3. Background facts giving rise to the appeal as projected 
by the claimants for compensation are as follows: 
E 
On 14.12.1998 at 8.40 p.m. one T.S.C Shekar, the 
• 
husband of claimant No.1 and father of claimant No.2 and son 
of claimant No. 3 were hit by the BMTC Bus bearing 
registration No.KA-01-F-300 driven in a rash and negligent 
F 
manner by its driver while he was at the BMTC bus stand at 
Bangalore. Due to such hit, he fell down suffering injuries and 
succumbed to the same. Claim in this regard was laid under 
Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation on the plea that 
the deceased was a permanent employee in the State 
Government working as a Superintendent on a salary of G 
Rs.12,239/- with other benefits of service and was aged 53 
years. Due to his sudden demise, they lost dependency as 
also consortium to the first claimant and love and affection to 
the second and third claimants. The claim was resisted by the 
BMTC contending that the vehicle in question was not involved 
H 
466 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2009) 3 S.C.R. 
A in the accident and also contending that the deceased was in 
an intoxicated state by consumption of alcohol as a 
consequence of which he imbalanced himself and fell without 
involvement of the .bus. By such a fall, he suffered injuries and 
succumbed to the same. In short, the BMTC disputed 
B involvement of the bus as a primary cause for the accident in 
question and thus sought to absolve itself of the noxious liability 
to pay compensation. 
Considering the evidence adduced the MACT fixed the 
c loss of dependency of Rs.10,77,032/- to which certain amounts 
were added towards conventional heads to arrive at the amount 
of Rs.11,04,032/-. The stand of the appellant was that the 
negligent act of the deceased himself had resulted in the 
accident and there was no negligence on the part of the driver 
of the bus. Before the High Court it was submitted that the 
D deceased was in an intoxicated state and, therefore, because 
of his negligence the accident occurred. The High Court noticed 
that there was no averment in the written statement and no 
evidence was led in t

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.