- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6920 OF 2021 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.229 OF 2022 (MV-D) IN MFA No.6920/2021: BETWEEN: THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED 5TH & 6TH FLOOR KRUSHI BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD HUDSON CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001 REP. BY MANAGER LEGAL …APPELLANT (BY SRI H.C.VRUSHABHENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI NOOR PASHA S/O.LATE BABA SAB NO.9/3, 2ND CROSS GOPALAPURAM BENGALURU NORTH SINCE DECEASED BY LRS. SMT.GULAB JAN W/O.SHAMIULLAD AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS OCC: HOUSE WIFE R/AT DEVASANDRA BENGALURU NORTH-560 036 2. SRI BABU N. S/O.LATE NOOR PASHA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 OCC:COOLIE, R/AT NO.63 BHUVANESHWARI NAGAR NANDINI LAYOUT BEHIND RING ROAD BENGALURU-560 096 3. SRI AKRAM PASHA S/O.LATE NOOR PASHA OCC:COOLIE, R/AT NO.36 'C' STREET, GOPALAPURA MAGADI ROAD BENGALURU-560 091 4. SRI RAFIQ S/O.LATE NOOR PASHA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS OCC: COOLIE 5. SMT.SHAHEENA TAJ W/O.NIZAMUDDIN AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS OCC:HOUSE WIFE 6. N.RESHMA D/O.LATE NOOR PASHA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS OCC: NIL R-4 to R-6 ARE R/AT NO.9/3, 2ND CROSS GOPALAPURAM BENGALURU-560 091 7. SRI ASIF PASHA S/O.ABDUL BASHEER NO.113, 'B' STREET 2ND CROSS GOPALAPURA BENGALURU-560 023 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SURESH M.LATUR, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3, R-5 & R-6; R-7 IS SERVED & UNREPRESENTED; APPEAL AGAINST R-4 STANDS ABATED V/O/DATED 18.04.2023) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.01.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.2255/2017 BY I ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU. IN MFA NO.229/2022: BETWEEN: 1. SRI NOOR PASHA S/O.LATE BABA SAB SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS. SMT.GULAB JAN W/O.SHAMIULLAD AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS OCC: HOUSE HOLD R/AT DEVASANDRA BENGALURU NORTH-560 036 2. SRI BABU N. S/O.LATE NOOR PASHA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS OCC: COOLIE R/AT NO.63 BHUVANESHWARI NAGAR NANDINI LAYOUT BEHIND RING ROAD BENGALURU NORTH-560 096 3. SRI AKRAM PASHA S/O.LATE NOOR PASHA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS OCC: COOLIE R/AT 29 'C' CROSS 'C' STREET, GOPALAPURA MAGADI ROAD BENGALURU-560 023 4. SMT.SHAHEENA TAJ W/O.NIZAMUDDIN - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS OCC: HOUSE WIFE 5. N RESHMA D/O.LATE NOOR PASHA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS OCC: NIL A-4 & A-5 ARE R/AT NO.9/3, 2ND CROSS GOPALAPURAM BENGALURU NORTH-560 023 ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI SURESH M. LATUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI ASIF PASHA S/O.ABDUL BASHEER NO.113, 'B' STREET 2ND CROSS, GOPALAPURA BENGALURU-560 023 2. THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED 5TH AND 6TH FLOOR KRUSHI BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD HUDSON CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 001 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H.C.VRUSHABHENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O. DATED 10.02.2025) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.01.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.2255/2017 BY I ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL JUDGMENT These appeals are preferred challenging the judgment and award dated 23.01.2021 passed in MVC.No.2255/2017 by I Additional Small Causes Judge and MACT, Bengaluru (for short ‘the tribunal’). The appeal preferred by the Insurance Company is seeking to set aside the impugned judgement and award on the ground raised in the appeal, whereas the appeal preferred by the claimants is founded on the premise of inadequate and meagre compensation awarded by the tribunal. 2. Parties to the appeals shall be referred to as per their status before the tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are as under: It is the case of the claimants that on 06.12.2016 at about 5:00 p.m., one Baba Sab was standing near 6th Cross, Magadi road, at that time, an auto rickshaw - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 bearing registration No.KA-02-AE-6258 came in a rash and negligent manner by taking reverse and dashed against the said Baba Sab. Due to the occurrence of the accident, initially, Baba Sab was injured and admitted to Victoria Hospital on the very same day. Despite taking treatment for almost 1½ years, he died on 29.03.2018 due to the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. Hence, the claimants/dependants filed claim petition seeking compensation. 3.1 Respondent Nos.1 and 2 being the owner of the offending vehicle-auto rickshaw and the Insurance Company filed statement of objections denying the claim of the claimants and sought for dismissal of the claim petition. Respondent No.1 took up the plea that in case if the tribunal were fastened the liability on him, the same requires to be saddled on the Insurance Company, in view of the policy being in force. Respondent No.2 did not deny the policy issued to respondent No.1. However, took up the plea that though the accident occurred, it is due to the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 negligence of the injured, who is presently deceased and the death has not occurred due to the injuries sustained in the accident. Therefore, there is no nexus between the injuries sustained and the death having occurred. On these grounds, seeks to set aside the judgement and award passed by the tribunal. 3.2 On the basis of the materials placed on record, both oral and documentary, the tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.4,82,689/- along with interest @ 9% p.a. and held that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and directed respondent No.2 to deposit the compensation amount within a period of 30 days. 3.3 Being aggrieved by the same, the Insurance Company is before this Court in MFA.No.6920/2021 seeking to set aside the judgment and award passed by the tribunal on the ground of it being erroneous and the claimants are also before this Court in MFA.No.229/2022 seeking enhancement of compensation. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 4. Learned counsel for Insurance Company contends that the impugned judgement and award passed by the tribunal requires to be set-aside for the reason that there is no nexus between the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident and the death having occurred after a period of almost 1 year 2 months. It is also contended by learned counsel that the claimants are not the dependents of the deceased, they are all adults, employed and living separately, so also, it is contended that claimant No.4 has died and he would not be entitled to any compensation. Learned counsel further contends that there is no post mortem report to suggest that the deceased died due to the injuries suffered from the road traffic accident, so also, it is contended as per Ex.P18, the son of the deceased has himself stated before Victoria Hospital that it was a self fall and therefore, it cannot be claimed to be road traffic accident and subsequently to suit the needs of the claimants, it is supported by respondent No.1, owner of the offending vehicle, who is in collusion with the claimants. On these grounds, he seeks to set aside the - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 impugned judgement and award and consequently allow the appeal filed by the Insurance Company. 5. It is the vehement contention of learned counsel for the claimants that the tribunal has committed an error in not awarding just and reasonable compensation ignoring the materials placed on record, both oral and documentary. He contends that the income ought to have taken at higher side, whereas the income is taken only at Rs.8,000/-. The compensation has not been awarded under the head pain and suffering, despite the deceased being admitted to the Hospital from 2016 to 2018. On these grounds, he seeks enhancement of compensation. 6. Having heard learned counsel for Insurance Company and learned counsel for claimants, the points that arise for consideration in the present case are:- "i) Whether the claimants are entitled to compensation? ii) Whether the claimants are entitled to loss of dependency or loss of estate? - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 iii) Whether the claimants can be termed as dependants? iv) Whether the compensation awarded is on the higher side? v) Whether the interest awarded requires to be reduced? vi) What order?" 7. The occurrence of accident, involvement of vehicle and injuries sustained by the deceased are all proved and established by production of Exs.P1 to P19. The claimants being related to the deceased are also proved by production of Exs.P8 to P14. The negligence has not been questioned by the driver. Therefore, the same is rightly attributed against the driver of the offending vehicle-auto rickshaw and it is retained. 8. Now coming to the question of age, avocation, income, multiplier and deduction for awarding compensation, it is seen that the deceased was aged 70 years as on the date of his death on 29.03.2018 after suffering injuries to his body on 06.12.2016 in the road - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 traffic accident. The tribunal applied the multiplier at '5', which is correct and does not call for interference. The tribunal taken the income at Rs.8000/- per month, whereas the notional income chart of the Legal Services Authority prescribes the income of Rs.9,500/- per month for the accident of the year 2016. Hence, the income is taken at Rs.9,500/- per month. 9. Now coming to the question as to whether the claimants could be termed as dependents of the deceased? Though the claimants have argued that they should be treated as dependents, no material is placed before the Court to show that they are dependants to the deceased. I am in agreement with learned counsel for Insurance Company that the claimants cannot be treated as dependents as they are adults and they are employed. Therefore, they can only be termed as legal heirs, who would be entitled to loss of estate. However, now the question would arise as to what would be the loss of estate that requires to be awarded to the claimants. - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had this occasion to deal with the matter in a situation, where the claimants who are not dependents are to be considered as legal heirs, but they are entitled for loss of estate, which would be 50% of the income. Therefore, in the present case, the income having been taken at Rs.9,500/- per month, 50% of it would be Rs.4,750/-. Therefore, the claimants are entitled to Rs.2,85,000/- (Rs.4,750/- x 12 x 5) towards loss of estate. 11. The tribunal awarded Rs.12,639/- towards medical expenses, which on the actual basis and bills produced. The same does not call for interference and is retained. 12. The tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, which does not call for interference and the same is retained. However, 20% escalation to be added on the same, which would come to Rs.18,000/- (Rs.15,000/- + 20%). - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 13. Learned counsel for claimants contends that the tribunal has failed to award any amount under the head pain and suffering. However, it is not in dispute that after the occurrence of accident on 06.12.2016 till the death of the deceased on 29.03.2018, he was suffering from the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident at the hospital or at the home. Therefore, the claimants would be entitled to loss of income during the period of treatment for the reason that they would have attended the deceased while he was alive either at the Hospital or at home. Therefore, the notional amount of Rs.25,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during the period of treatment rather than pain and suffering. 14. I am in agreement with learned counsel for Insurance Company that in a situation of the present case on hand, there cannot be compensation awarded twice towards loss of estate. Hence, loss of estate awarded by the tribunal at Rs.15,000/- is set-aside, so also, the claimants would not be entitled to the compensation - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 towards loss of consortium as they would be entitled to only loss of estate. Therefore, The compensation awarded by the tribunal towards loss of filial consortium at Rs.2,00,000/- is also set aside. 15. In view of the above, the claimants would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.3,40,639/- as against Rs.4,82,639/- awarded by the tribunal, as mentioned in the table below: Sl. No. Head of compensation Amount of compensation awarded in Rs. 1 Loss of Estate 2,85,000-00 2 Medical expenses 12,639-00 3 Funeral expenses 18,000-00 4 Loss of income during the period of treatment 25,000-00 Total 3,40,639-00 16. I am also in agreement with learned counsel for Insurance Company that the interest component awarded by the tribunal is exorbitantly high and the same requires to be reduced or toned down to 6% p.a. rather than 9% p.a. - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 17. Under the circumstance, the points for consideration are answered accordingly. Hence, I pass the following: ORDER i) These appeals are disposed off; ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 23.01.2021 passed in MVC.No.2255/2017 by I Additional Small Causes Judge and MACT, Bengaluru, is hereby modified; iii) The claimants are entitled to the total compensation of Rs.3,40,639/- as against Rs.4,82,639/- along with interest at 6% per annum; iv) The balance compensation, if any, shall be paid by the Insurance Company within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; v) The amount deposited by the Insurance Company shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional tribunal forthwith; - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC:5982 MFA No. 6920 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 229 of 2022 vi) The entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of the claimants as per the terms of the tribunal by Electronic transfer to the claimants upon furnishing the required bank details/upon proper identification; vii) Registry is directed to transmit the original records to the jurisdictional tribunal forthwith. viii) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal with regard to apportionment and release are retained; Pending interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and the same pale into insignificance. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE LB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 74