Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 75 (KAR)

SUSHEELAMMA v. NOORUDDIN

2003-01-22

M.F.SALDANHA, M.S.RAJENDRA PRASAD

body2003
SALDANHA, J. ( 1 ) THE Motor Accidents claims Tribunal-Ill, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, in the M. V. C. No. 986 of 1993, awarded aggregate compensation of rs. 2,26,944 to the wife and minor children of deceased Muniraju, who was working as Driver-cum-Excise Guard in the Excise department. At about 3 a. m. on the morning of 15. 6. 1993, he was driving car No. MEY 6000 from Kolar towards Bangalore and it has been established that due to the negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry No. MYT 5310, a collision took place near Hosakote, resulting in the death of muniraju. The Tribunal, for the purpose of computation had accepted the figure of rs. 2,364 as the monthly salary of the deceased and there is no dispute about the fact that the computation seems to have been rightly done except for the fact that on re-examination, we find that the correct multiplier ought to have been 15 and not 12. We have accordingly done the requisite re-computation, but, we need to deal with the other legal aspect that is of some consequence in this case. ( 2 ) WHILE there is no dispute about the figures relating to the salary income of the deceased, what has been brought on record is that he was a Government employee and that he was aged only 36 years when the accident took place. It has also been demonstrated that the salaries came to be revised and the necessary evidence from the Department has been procured for the purpose of establishing that the revised salary of the Excise Guard would have been Rs. 3,498 per month as on March, 1996. On the basis of this evidence, the appellants' learned advocate pointed out to us that the courts have now accepted the principle, while assessing the income, etc. , of taking into consideration the element of future potential/increase in the earning capacity and his submission is that irrespective of anything else, the deceased himself would have been drawing a higher salary by virtue of the revision which the tribunal has overlooked. Our attention has been invited to the decision of the Apex court in Sarala Dixit v. Balwant Yadav, 1996 ACJ 581 (SC), wherein the Supreme court had occasion to reiterate the principles earlier laid down in General manager, Kerala State Road Trans. Corpn. Our attention has been invited to the decision of the Apex court in Sarala Dixit v. Balwant Yadav, 1996 ACJ 581 (SC), wherein the Supreme court had occasion to reiterate the principles earlier laid down in General manager, Kerala State Road Trans. Corpn. v. Susamma Thomas, 1994 ACJ 1 (SC ). The law is well settled with regard to these principles and it was very necessary for the Tribunal to have taken cognizance to the effect that while doing a notional calculation of what the earning capacity of the deceased would have been in the projected future, it was very necessary to take into account the fact that by virtue of the upward revision of the salary the old figures on the basis of which the working has been done would not hold good. Since there is no evidence before us with regard to the exact date from when the revision has taken place, we have taken into account the point of time when the evidence was tendered and Exh. P-14, which is the tabulation, was presented before the Tribunal as an exhibit and consequently, we have maintained the computation for the first three years and thereafter revised it and applied the multiplier of 15 for'the remaining period from 1996, on the basis of the higher figure of Rs. 3,498 per month. On the basis of this figure, revised compensation will work out to Rs. 3,92,544 out of which deducting Rs. 2,26,944, the amount awarded earlier, balance of Rs. 1,65,600 will work out as the enhancement. ( 3 ) THE appellants' learned advocate has pointed out to us that the Tribunal was in error in not having awarded interest. That error will have to be corrected and consequently, the interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum for the entire period, i. e. , from the date of application up to the date of payment will have to be computed on the aggregate amount. The balance amount to be deposited with the Tribunal within an outer limit of 12 weeks from today. ( 4 ) OUT of the amount to be deposited, the Claims Tribunal shall invest a sum of Rs. 2,00,000 in the name of the wife susheelamma and a sum of Rs. 50,000 each in the names of the two sons. The balance amount to be deposited with the Tribunal within an outer limit of 12 weeks from today. ( 4 ) OUT of the amount to be deposited, the Claims Tribunal shall invest a sum of Rs. 2,00,000 in the name of the wife susheelamma and a sum of Rs. 50,000 each in the names of the two sons. All the three deposits to be placed in the Post office Monthly Income Scheme which is tax free. The amounts to be invested for two periods of six years each in these accounts in the joint names of the respective applicants and any other person of their choice as a nominee. The Tribunal shall ensure that a Post Office closest to where the applicants reside is chosen for this purpose, that an S. B. Account is opened into which the monthly interest shall go and it is open to the applicants to withdraw the monthly interest from time to time. The balance of the enhanced compensation, along with the interest, to be released to applicant No. 1, wife. ( 5 ) WE consider it absolutely essential and in the general public interest to direct certain immediate corrective steps in the light of what has transpired in this case. The deceased was driving the car at about 3 a. m. in the morning and the record indicates that a whole line of vehicles coming from the opposite direction had their headlights blazing. This totally dazzled the deceased Muniraju and the second last vehicle happened to be a luxury bus with as many as six blinding lights on it. This had a totally blinding effect on Muniraju who was in no position to avoid the oncoming lorry which was approaching at high speed and again, with the headlights blazing at full blast. It is true that the negligence has been established on the part of the lorry driver but the important point here is that the record clearly establishes that but for being totally blinded and virtually stunned, Muniraju who was driving carefully and at a safe speed would certainly have been able to take evasive action that could have saved his life. The principal cause of the head-on collision was the intensity of the headlights. The principal cause of the head-on collision was the intensity of the headlights. The record also indicates that the bus which has preceded the lorry and which was the vehicle that initially blinded Muniraju had lights of an abnormal intensity possibly high powered halogen lamps but the most important aspect is that not a single one of these vehicles had dipped their headlights. They were all driven on the high powered main beam which is an offence vis-a-vis the oncoming driver. The lethal consequences of using the high beams against oncoming traffic have been highlighted a number of times by the media, individuals and organisations but the police and transport authorities of the State Government are so utterly thick skinned and totally immune to any form of reason or for that matter even to the aspect of attending to their lawful duties. Not only does every blazing headlight expose the other road users to potential injury and damage but it has been demonstrated that it is extremely harmful to the eyesight of the other road users. Despite all of this having been pointed out to the police authorities a recent inquiry has shown that nothing has been done in this state to check this avoidable menace and it is not surprising that in the course of the last 5 years not even one offender has been penalised anywhere in the whole State of karnataka. It is necessary for us to shake the police and the transport authorities out of their indolence because a valuable life has been lost in this case and hundred more in others apart from injuries and damage and we, therefore, issue the following directions: that the police and the transport authorities shall prominently communicate through the press and the electronic media to all road users all over the State that there shall be a total ban on the use of high beams within town and city limits. Even as far as highways are concerned, the high beam can only be used provided there is no oncoming traffic and at all other times the low beams will have to be used. All vehicles are provided with dippers and the headlights are scientifically engineered in such a way that the low beam does not dazzle the oncoming driver. Even as far as highways are concerned, the high beam can only be used provided there is no oncoming traffic and at all other times the low beams will have to be used. All vehicles are provided with dippers and the headlights are scientifically engineered in such a way that the low beam does not dazzle the oncoming driver. At the same time, the police shall take stringent action against the unauthorised use of any extra powerful or extra bright headlamps which are a potential danger to the other road users. The police and transport authorities shall bring it to the notice of all road users including the two-wheelers that stringent action will be taken with immediate effect against any person who breaches these directions and in order to enforce these directions the police shall book the offenders with an on-the-spot fine. Since this is a serious offence and since it has become the order of the day to disregard the law, a special drive shall be instituted which shall be for an initial period of six months but it is very necessary that all the enforcement staff be strictly instructed to penalise each and everyone of the offenders so that the situation is brought under control. In those of the cities like Bangalore where the road lighting has now been improved to the extent that the use of headlights is unnecessary, the Commissioner of Police shall also consider the desirability of prohibiting the use of headlights within the city limits on the lines of Mumbai where the use of headlights within/the city limits is not permitted. The Director General of Police and the Secretary to Government, Transport department, Government of Karnataka to report compliance to this court within a period of four weeks from today indicating the exact nature of the steps taken and the initial results thereof. ( 6 ) THE appeal succeeds to this extent and stands disposed of. Parties to bear their own costs. Registrar General to forward a copy of this judgment forthwith to the Director general of Police and to the Secretary to government, Transport Department, Govt. of Karnataka with instructions to comply with the directions of this court. Appeal allowed. --- *** --- .