- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5294 MFA No. 4561 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MFA NO. 4561 OF 2020 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SWETHA W/O LATE GANGADHAR K, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, 2. RAGHAV M G, S/O LATE GANGADHAR K, AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS, SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN BY MOTHER SMT. SHWETHA 3. SRI KRISHNAPPA, S/O MAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS, ALL ARE OLD RESIDENTS OF MARANAGERE, TIPTUR TALUK, NOW RESIDENTS OF BHAGYANAGARA, KASABA HOBLI, TUMAKURU TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT - 577 101. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI M. B. RYAKA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI MANJUNATH T K, S/O LATE T K KALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5294 MFA No. 4561 of 2020 RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO.58, GARDEN HOUSE, BASAVANAHALLI VILLAGE, GURUGADAHALLI POST, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 101. 2. THE MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ISSUED OFFICE AT HASSAN. SERVICE ADDRESS: THE MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CENTENARY BUILDING, M G ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI H. S. LINGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 20.04.2023, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.10.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1229/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MACT, TUMAKURU, 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 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5294 MFA No. 4561 of 2020 ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the claimants aggrieved by the inadequate compensation awarded by the I Additional District Judge and MACT at Tumkur. 2. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the appellants / Claimants that the tribunal has awarded inadequate and meager compensation and has not awarded suitable income for computation of compensation, so also under the Head of Consortium suitable compensation is not awarded and hence, they seek to allow the appeal and consequently enhance the compensation. 2.1 The tribunal on consideration of the materials placed before it, both oral and documentary, has awarded total compensation of Rs.13,29,400/- along with interest at 6% P.A. and directed the respondent No.2 - Insurance Company to pay the compensation amount. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company contends that there is no error in the impugned judgment and award passed by the tribunal and the same does not call for interference. The - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5294 MFA No. 4561 of 2020 tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation by adopting the correct income and multiplier. On these grounds, he seeks for dismissal of the appeal. 4. The occurrence of accident, involvement of the vehicle and death having occurred due to the road traffic accident is proved and established by production of Exs.P1 to P17. The Insurance company has not challenged the criminal prosecution. Hence, negligence is rightly attributed against the driver of the offending vehicle which is Mahindra goods vehicle. 5. Now coming to the question of age, multiplier, deduction and compensation on other heads, it is seen that deceased was aged 34 years as on date of occurrence of accident and the appropriate multiplier is taken as '16', which is correct and does not call for interference. Towards future prospectus, 40% is added considering the age of deceased and the same is retained. Income taken by the tribunal was Rs.7,000/- for lack of production of any proof of income, however, in view of the notional income chart of the Legal Services Authority, the income is required to be taken as 11,000/- as against 7,000/- and accordingly it is taken. The - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5294 MFA No. 4561 of 2020 deduction towards personal and living expenses is taken at 1/3rd, which does not call for interference and the same is retained. Therefore, the loss of dependency would be Rs.19,71,264/- (11,000/- + 40% = 15,400/- - 1/3rd = 10,267/- x 12 x 16) as against Rs.12,54,000/-. 6. Towards loss of consortium, as there are three dependents, each would be entitled to Rs.40,000/- per person. Hence, Rs.1,20,000/- is awarded with 20% escalation in addition i.e., Rs.24,000 is added to this amount. Towards funeral expenses and loss of a state, Rs.15,000/- each is awarded and 20% is added as escalation, hence, Rs.6000/- is added to this amount. 7. Therefore, in view of the above discussions, the appellants / claimants would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.21,51,264/- as against Rs.13,29,400/- as mentioned in the table below: Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency 19,71,264-00 Loss of consortium 1,20,000-00 Loss of consortium + 20% escalation 24,000-00 Loss of estate and funeral 30,000-00 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:5294 MFA No. 4561 of 2020 expenses Loss of estate and funeral expenses + 20% escalation 6,000-00 TOTAL 21,51,264-00 8. Accordingly, I pass the following ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part; ii) The Judgment and award dated 23.10.2019 passed by I Addl. District Judge and MACT at Tumakuru in MVC No.1229/2017 is modified; iii) The appellants/claimants would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.21,51,264/- as against Rs.13,29,400/- along with interest at 6% P.A. iv) The balance enhanced compensation shall be paid within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. v) All other stipulations of disbursement, apportionment / release as ordered by the tribunal is retained. vi) ordered accordingly. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:5294 MFA No. 4561 of 2020 vii) It is made clear that the compensation amount awarded to appellant No.3 (as he was a claimant No.4 before the tribunal) shall be entitled to release of the entire amount upon proper identification in view of his advanced stage. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE THM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3