- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4173 MFA No. 1150 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1150 OF 2023 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RANI. K.R. W/O LATE ROHITH K M AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/AT NO 5, 15TH CROSS MALAGLA ,NAGARABHAVI, BENGALURU - 72 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NAIK KRISHNA VENKATRAMAN.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INS. CO., LTD., 5TH AND 6TH FLOOR KRISHI BHAVAN BUILDING, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU. 2. MRS S NAGARATHNA W/O M JAYARAM MAJOR, R/AT NO 16/1,3RD MAIN, 8TH CROSS, GOVINDARAJANAGAR, Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4173 MFA No. 1150 of 2023 VIJAYANAGAR, BENGALURU 560040 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MOHAN KUMAR T.,ADVOCATE FOR R1) (VIDE ORDER DATED 17.01.2025, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.11.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO. 4396/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH.13), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the claimant on the premise of inadequate compensation awarded by the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC No.4396/2021. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4173 MFA No. 1150 of 2023 2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the tribunal. 3. The short points for consideration in this case is whether the claimant who's the wife of deceased Rohith K.M is entitled to compensation to be enhanced on the ground of personal and living expenses deduction at the rate of 1/3rd rather than 50% what is taken by the tribunal. The occurrence of accident, involvement of the vehicle, deceased having succumbed to the injuries, the appellant being the wife/spouse of the deceased have been proved and established by production of Ex.P1 to Ex.P 12. In view of non production of proof of income tribunal has assessed the income of Rs.15,000/- per month on the basis of notional income of the legal Services Authority Chart same is retained and is not interfered. The deceased was aged 65 years multiplier of 7 is taken which also is not interfered. The tribunal has deducted 50% of income towards personal and living expenses of the deceased on the ground that the appellant/dependant is the only one person who is - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4173 MFA No. 1150 of 2023 dependent on the deceased. Therefore the tribunal on the basis of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121 has taken the deductions at 50% which is questioned by the learned counsel for the appellant on the ground that the said deduction ought to be taken at 1/3rd towards personal living expenses as it draws a distinction between a married person and a bachelor /unmarried person. This aspect of the matter has been considered by me in my earlier judgment in the case of Smt.Rama V/s Nagaraja.M in MFA No.4016/2022 decided on 12.01.2024 where by the deduction is taken at 1/3rd at paragraph No.6 for a married person. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon judgment of Coordinate Bench of this Court in MFA No.7089/2016 C/w 6824/2016 decided on 19.09.2024 where similar issue was the subject matter and at paragraph 14 the Co-ordinate bench of this Court has held as under: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4173 MFA No. 1150 of 2023 " The Hon'ble Apex Court while dealing with a married person, clearly said that 1/3rd has to be deducted. But there is no specific mention either in paragraph Nos.30 and 31 or in body of the judgment that, in case of a married person died leaving behind spouse alone, 50% has to be deducted towards personal expenses. The Hon'ble Apex Court specifically mentioned with reference to the bachelor that 50% has to be deducted towards personal expenses. If the intention of the Hon'ble Apex Court to deduct 50% in case of a spouse, it could have been mentioned specifically in paragraph No.30. Under such circumstances, argument of the Insurance Company is not persuasive to deduct 50% towards personal expenses in a case of married person. Hence, it is proper to deduct 1/3rd towards personal expenses. Then loss of dependency is Rs.8,000/- + 800(10%) = 8,800 - 2,933 (1/3rd) = 5,867 x 12 x 11 = Rs.7,74,444/-." 4. On these grounds learned counsel for the appellant contends that the deduction towards personal and living expenses has to be taken at 1/3rd rather than 50%. 5. Per Contra, learned counsel representing the Insurance Company Sri.Mohan Kumar.T vehemently contends that the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Sarla - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4173 MFA No. 1150 of 2023 Verma (Smt) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121 in the paragraph.No.13 has held where the deceased was married, the deduction towards personal and living expenses should be 1/3rd where the number of dependent family members is 2 to 3. Therefore, he contends in the present case the appellant being the sole dependent and there being no more than one person would not fall within the paragraph No.13 deduction to be calculated at 1/3rd. Therefore, he contends that when there is a sole dependent, the deduction would have to be taken at 50% towards personal and living expenses as there is no other member for taking deduction. Had it been the situation of more than 2 or 3 persons then 1/3rd could have to be taken. 6. The contention taken by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company cannot be accepted for the reasons that the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others vs. Delhi Transport - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:4173 MFA No. 1150 of 2023 Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121 stated here in supra has drawn a distinction from paragraph No.30 paragraph No.31 where in at paragraph No.31, they have decided the matter with regard to personal and living expenses of a bachelor to be deducted at 50% where as for a married person the deduction does not draw any distinction or difference for one person living or more than one person dependents. Under the circumstances this aspects very specifically has been dealt with by a Co-ordinate bench of this Court mentioned here in above supra at paragraph No.14 stated above which also is my opinion with regard to the deduction towards personal and living expenses 7. In case of a the situation where for married person if there is a spouse who is the sole claimant, Hon'ble Apex Court would have specifically stated at paragraph No.30 that the personal expenses and living expenses deduction in case of a sole spouse or a sole dependent for a married person would be 50% whereas it - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:4173 MFA No. 1150 of 2023 is not said so at paragraph No.30 in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt) and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another reported in (2009) 6 Supreme Court Cases 121 stated supra the only distinction is that if a person deceased is a bachelor then the deduction automatically would be 50% towards personal and living expenses. Under the circumstances I am agreement with learned counsel for the appellant that the deduction towards personal and living expenses in the present case where the deceased was married left behind spouse the deduction would have to be taken at 1/3rd rather than 50%. Accordingly, loss of dependency would be as under: Rs.15,000/- - 1/3rd = Rs.10,000/- X 12 X 7 = Rs.8,40,000/- as against Rs.6,30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 8. Towards loss of Consortium Rs.44,000/-, towards transportation of dead body, Funeral and - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:4173 MFA No. 1150 of 2023 obsequies expenses Rs.15,000/-, towards loss to estate Rs.20,000/- are retained. 9. In view of the above discussions, appellant would be entitled for a total compensation of Rs.9,19,000/- as against Rs.7,09,000/- as mentioned in the table below: Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency 8,40,000.00 Loss of Consortium 44,000.00 Loss to estate 20,000.00 Transportation of dead body, Funeral and Obsequies Expenses 15,000.00 TOTAL 9,19,000-00 10. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated 15.11.2022 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and II Addl. Judge & ACMM, Court of Small - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:4173 MFA No. 1150 of 2023 Causes, Bengaluru in MVC.No.4396/2021 is modified; iii) The claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.9,19,000/- as against Rs.7,09,000/- awarded by the tribunal along with interest at 6% p.a. iv) The appellant would be entitled to interest at 6% p.a. for enhanced compensation within a period of four weeks from today from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. v) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal shall stand intact. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE RCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6