- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8959 MFA No. 2938 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2938 OF 2023(MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. NARASAPPA, S/O BHIMAYYA, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, 2. SHARANAMMA, W/O NARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS. BOTH ARE RESIDING AT: MATMARI, RAICHUR, KARNATAKA. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SREENIVASAIAH A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DODDA BASAVESHWARA PARCEL CARRIERS WARD NO.16, RAGHAVENDRA TALKIES ROAD, CITY PRESS COMPOUND, BELLARY, KARNATAKA - 583 101. 2. THE MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 5th FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, 28, M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI D.VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 25.05.2023, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED) Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8959 MFA No. 2938 of 2023 THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.02.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.817/2022 BY IX ASCJ, SMALL CAUSES AND ADDITIONAL MACT, BENGALURU. 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 claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 07.02.2023 passed in MVC.No.817/2022 by IX ASCJ Small Causes and Additional MACT, Bengaluru (for short ‘the tribunal’). This appeal is founded on the premise of inadequacy of compensation awarded by the tribunal. 2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are as under: On 08.11.2021 at about 12.15 p.m., the deceased Srinivas was riding a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-01-HM-1949. At that time, a TATA Goods vehicle bearing registration No.KA-34-C-2362 came in a rash and - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8959 MFA No. 2938 of 2023 negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased. Due to the said impact, the deceased Srinivas fell down and sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same. Hence, the claimants filed a claim petition seeking compensation. 3.1 On the basis of material evidence, both oral and documentary and on hearing the submissions of learned counsels for both parties, the tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.22,52,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. 3.2 Being aggrieved by the meager compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimants are before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. 4. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for appellants-claimants that the tribunal has committed an error in awarding inadequate compensation by not taking into consideration the avocation of the deceased to be a driver and has not awarded suitable compensation by not taking the correct income as that of - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8959 MFA No. 2938 of 2023 the driver, as the appellants-claimants pleaded that the deceased was earning Rs.30,000/- per month as a driver. It is on this aspect that the appellants-claimants are before this Court to consider the income on the higher side than taking a notional income of Rs.15,000/- per month, has awarded by the tribunal and enhance the compensation. He further contends that the tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation under other heads also. Accordingly, he seeks enhancement of compensation. 5. Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondent-Insurance Company contends that the appellants-claimants have not placed any material before the tribunal or before this Court to show the deceased was working as a driver. In the absence of any such material before the tribunal, no fault can be found against the tribunal for having taken the notional income of Rs.15,000/- per month, which is stipulated in the Legal Services Authority chart. Even before this Court, if the appellants-claimants have placed any such material, the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8959 MFA No. 2938 of 2023 tribunal would have considered it, but in the absence of the same, it cannot be presumed that the deceased was working as a driver. On these grounds, he seeks dismissal of the appeal. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for appellants- claimants and learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company, the occurrence of the accident, involvement of the vehicle and death having occurred due to the road traffic accident are all established and proved by the production of Exs.P1 to P9. 7. The only question is whether the income is to be taken higher than Rs.15,000/- per month awarded by the tribunal. In the absence of any material with regard to the avocation or income, the tribunal and this Court are left with no other alternative, but to do a guesswork on the notional income chart prescribed by the Legal Services Authority; even if there is no proof of income, atleast the details of the avocation and some material to that effect, either oral or documentary, ought to have been placed by - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8959 MFA No. 2938 of 2023 the appellants-claimants for seeking higher income other than notional income. In the present case, no such materials having been produced and no evidence having been led, the notional income taken by the tribunal at Rs.15,000/- per month is justifiable and the same is sustained. Therefore, no fault can be found in the impugned judgment and award against the tribunal for assessing the notional income at Rs.15,000/- per month of the deceased for awarding compensation. Therefore, Rs.21,42,000/- awarded by the tribunal towards loss of dependency is retained. 8. The tribunal awarded Rs.80,000/- towards loss of consortium, which does not call for interference. However, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680, 10% escalation for one block period on the same to be awarded under this head, which would come to Rs.88,000/- (Rs.80,000/- + 10%). - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:8959 MFA No. 2938 of 2023 9. The tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, which also do not call for interference. In all, the claimants would be entitled to Rs.30,000/- under these heads. However, 10% escalation on the same to be awarded, which would come to Rs.33,000/- (Rs.30,000/- + 10%). 10. In view of the above, the claimants shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.22,63,000/- as against Rs.22,52,000/- as mentioned in the table below: Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency 21,42,000-00 Loss of consortium 88,000-00 Loss of estate and funeral expenses 33,000-00 TOTAL 22,63,000-00 11. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed-in-part; ii) The judgment and award dated 07.02.2023 passed in MVC.No.817/2022 by IX ASCJ Small Causes and Additional MACT, Bengaluru, is modified; - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:8959 MFA No. 2938 of 2023 iii) The claimants shall be entitled to a sum of Rs.22,63,000/- as against Rs.22,52,000/- along with interest @ 6% p.a.; iv) The enhanced compensation amount shall be paid by the respondent-Insurance Company with interest at 6% p.a. within a period of four weeks before the jurisdictional tribunal from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; v) The compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellants-claimants; vi) The appellants-claimants shall be entitled to withdraw the amount as per the terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal; vii) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal are undisturbed and retained; viii) The original records shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional tribunal forthwith. ix) Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE CPN CT:SNN