- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4010 MFA No. 1003 of 2019 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.1003 OF 2019(MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PARVATHAMMA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, W/O YOGESH, 2. SMT. SHIVAKUMARAMMA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, W/O OMKARAPPA, BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF NARAYANAPPA BUILDING, I BLOCK, I STAGE, PEENYA, BENGALURU - 560 058. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI NAGARAJA REDDY D., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.5/4, 3RD FLOOR, SV ARCADE, BILEKAHALLI MAIN ROAD, BILEKAHALLI OFFICE, BG ROAD, IIM POST, BENGALURU -560 076. REP. BY ITS MANAGER. 2. GIRISH Y.R., MAJOR, S/O RAJEGOWDA, NO.43, 13TH CROSS, CHOKKASANDRA, T.DASARAHALLI POST, BENGALURU - 560 057. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI B.C.SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 13.01.2025, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED) Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4010 MFA No. 1003 of 2019 THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.11.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.5220/2017 BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AT 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 13.11.2018 passed in MVC.No.5220/2017 by the Court of the MACT, Court of Small Causes, 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 20.07.2017 at about 3.20 p.m., the deceased- Sharadamma was crossing the road near Peenya 1st stage, Metro station, Bengaluru, at that time, a Etios Car bearing - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4010 MFA No. 1003 of 2019 registration No.KA-50-D-6753 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the deceased Sharadamma. Due to the said impact, the deceased Sharadamma fell down and sustained grievous injures. Immediately, she was shifted to Ravi Kirloskar Hospital, Bengaluru, wherein, first aid treatment was given and thereafter, to NIMHANS, wherein, she took treatment. Later, to Sapthagiri Hospital, Bengaluru and from there she was shifted to Shimoga Hospital, wherein, she succumbed to the injuries. Hence, the claimants filed a claim petition seeking compensation. 3.1 On service of notice, respondents appeared through their counsel and filed their respective written statements, denying the averments made in the claim petition and sought for dismissal of the claim petition. 3.2 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.69,215/- with interest @ 8% p.a. and - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4010 MFA No. 1003 of 2019 directed respondent No.2-Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount within sixty days. 3.3 Being aggrieved by the inadequate 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 meager compensation, which calls for interference at the hands of this Court. The tribunal has failed to award compensation towards loss of dependency. Accordingly, he seeks enhancement of compensation. 5. Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondent-Insurance Company sustains the impugned order and contends that the tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation. He also contends that the claimants cannot be treated as dependents as they are daughters, who are married and living along with their - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4010 MFA No. 1003 of 2019 respective husbands and there is no material to show that they are dependents on the date of occurrence of the accident. Hence, he seeks dismissal of the appeal. 6. Heard learned counsel for appellants-claimants and learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company, a short point that would arise for consideration: "(i) Whether the appellants-claimants are entitled for compensation towards loss of dependency? (ii) Whether the appellants-claimants are entitled for compensation towards loss of estate? (iii) If so what is the amount?" 7. Having perused the impugned judgment and award, 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 P12. It is also not in dispute that the appellants-claimants are the children of deceased Sharadamma, but there is a serious dispute with regard to - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4010 MFA No. 1003 of 2019 appellants-claimants being dependents of deceased Sharadamma. 8. Now coming to the aspect of age, avocation, income and appropriate multiplier to be adopted, the tribunal has erroneously taken the age of the deceased to be 61 years. The date of birth of the deceased as per the Aadhaar card is 1.1.1957 and therefore, the age of the deceased as on the date of accident would be 60 years and the appropriate multiplier would be '9'. The tribunal taken the income of the deceased to be Rs.8,000/- per month. However, the notional income chart of the Legal Services Authority prescribes the income of Rs.11,000/- for the accident of the year 2017. Accordingly, income is taken as Rs.11,000/-. However, the tribunal did not find any good reason to award loss of dependency or loss of estate, it has not awarded any compensation in these two heads. Considering the fact that the appellants are children, they may not be dependents of the deceased on her income, but they are the legal representatives of the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:4010 MFA No. 1003 of 2019 deceased Sharadamma. Therefore, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited v/s Vinish Jain and others reported in (2018) 3 SCC 619, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that 50% could be taken as a deduction towards loss of dependency. Hence, in my opinion, the claimants would be entitled to loss of estate rather than loss of dependency. Therefore, in the present case as well, 50% of the income of Rs.11,000/- for the accident year 2017 could be taken for assessing the loss of estate. Therefore, the claimants would be entitled to the compensation of Rs.5,94,000/- (Rs.11,000/- - 50% = Rs.5,500/- x 12 x 9) towards loss of estate. 9. The tribunal awarded Rs.14,215/- towards medical expenses, which does not call for interference and the same is retained. 10. The tribunal awarded Rs.40,000/- towards loss of love and affection and the same requires to be modified. As there are two dependents, each would be entitled to a - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:4010 MFA No. 1003 of 2019 sum of Rs.40,000/- per head as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680. Therefore, under the head loss of consortium, the claimants are entitled for Rs.80,000/- (Rs.40,000/- x 2) along with 10% escalation towards one block period, which would be Rs.88,000/- (Rs.80,000/- + 10%). 11. The tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/- towards funeral and transportation expenses and the same requires to be modified. I deem it appropriate to award an amount of Rs.30,000/- under this head. However, 10% escalation on the same to be awarded, which would come to Rs.33,000/- (Rs.30,000/- + 10%). 12. In view of the above, the claimants would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.7,29,215/- as against Rs.69,215/- as mentioned in the table below: Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of estate 5,94,000-00 - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:4010 MFA No. 1003 of 2019 Loss of consortium 88,000-00 Funeral and transportation expenses 33,000-00 Medical expenses 14,215-00 TOTAL 7,29,215-00 13. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed-in-part; ii) The judgment and award dated 13.11.2018 passed in MVC.No.5220/2017 by the Court of MACT, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, is modified; iii) The claimants shall be entitled to a sum of Rs.7,29,215/- as against Rs.69,215/- along with interest @ 8% p.a.; iv) The interest awarded by the tribunal at the rate of 8% p.a. on the compensation amount of Rs.69,215/- is left undisturbed. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a.; - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:4010 MFA No. 1003 of 2019 v) The enhanced compensation amount shall be paid within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; vi) The compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellants-claimants as per the terms of the Tribunal by electronic transfer to the claimant upon furnishing the required Bank details/upon proper identification; vii) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal are undisturbed and retained; viii) Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE CPN