BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court has ruled that on the death of the mathadhipati in a road accident, the mutt or his successor would be the legal representative, entitling compensation for the “loss of dependency”.
A division bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj and Justice Tyagaraja N Invally passed the order recently, allowing the appeal filed by S B Shivamurthy Shivachary Hiremutt, a priest of the mutt from Yadgir district.
Hiremutt became the successor of the mutt following the death of Sutreshwar Shivacharya Swamiji, priest of Bale Honnur Shrimad Rambapur Virsinhasan Mutt, at the age of 55, in an accident on May 20, 2011.
Through this order, the compensation has been enhanced to Rs 5.94 lakh, including Rs 5,54,400 for loss of dependency, from the total compensation of Rs 1.20 lakh awarded by the Motor Vehicle Accident Tribunal.
Hiremutt challenged the order, dated September 1, 2023, passed by the tribunal, declining the compensation under ‘loss of dependency’ on the ground that the successor of the mutt was not a legal representative to claim it.
“The tribunal, in our considered opinion, has fallen into error by holding that a mathadhipati is an ascetic who severs all connections with his natural family, and that, as such, there can be no dependency,” the court said.
The court noted that the mutt represents the estate and interest of the deceased in a legal and functional sense, and it qualifies as a ‘legal representative’ within the meaning of law. The mutt has suffered institutional and economic loss on account of the death and the denial of compensation by the tribunal is contrary to settled legal principles.
The reasoning of the tribunal, therefore, cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. The claim for compensation, including under the head of loss of dependency, is maintainable at the instance of the mutt, the court added.
Citing the verdicts of the apex court on the issue in question, the high court stated that the law of compensation, particularly under the Motor Vehicles Act, is a beneficial legislation, intended to provide just and equitable relief. The interpretation of expressions such as ‘legal representative’ and ‘dependency’ must, therefore, be liberal and purposive, rather than restrictive, the court opined.
It also mentioned that the death of mathadhipati results not merely in the cessation of an individual life, but in a tangible institutional loss, including loss of spiritual leadership, disruption of administrative continuity, diminution in institutional efficacy, and potential impact on offerings and institutional income. Such loss is neither speculative nor remote, but is a direct consequence of the death and is therefore compensable in law, the court said.