- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5156 OF 2021 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1593 OF 2023 (MV-D) IN MFA No. 5156/2021 BETWEEN: THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO. 750, RECTIFIER HOUSE, NAIGAUM CROSS ROAD, NEXT TO ROYAL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, WADA (W), MUMBAI - 400 031, REP. BY ITS MANAGER LEGAL NO. 28, 5TH FLOOR, EAST WING, CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. D VIJAYAKUMAR., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. KEMPAMMA W/O. LATE. RAMAIAH K M, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS 2. SMT. USHA R D/O. LATE. RAMAIAH K M, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 3. SRI. NAVEEN KUMAR R., S/O. LATE. RAMAIAH K M, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 4. SRI. SUNIL KUMAR R., S/O. LATE. RAMAIAH K M, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT KEMPATHIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE, KANNAMANGALA POST, KASABA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 164. 5. SYED ZAKI S/O. BASITH S A, AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS, R/AT NO. 44, P AND T COLONY, 2ND BLOCK, 2ND CROSS, R.T. NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 032. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.PRABHUGOUDA B.TUMBIGI.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; R5-SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.03.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 40/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, DEVANAHALLI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS. 13,42,218/- WITH 9 PERCENT OF INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN MFA NO. 1593/2023 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. KEMPAMMA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, W/O LATE RAMAIAH K M, 2. USHA R AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, D/O LATE RAMAIAH K M, 3. NAVEEN KUMAR R AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, S/O LATE RAMAIAH K M, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 4. SUNIL KUMAR R AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, S/O LATE RAMAIAH K M, ALL R/AT KEMPATHIMANAHALLI VILLAGE, KANNAMANGALA POST, KASABA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. PRABHUGOUDA B. TUMBIGI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SYED ZAKI AGED ABOUT 82 YEARS, S/O BASITH S A, R/AT NO 44, P AND T COLONY, 2ND BLOCK, 2ND CROSS, R T NAGARA, BENGALURU 560 032. 2. THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. REGISTERED OFFICE AT NO 750, RECTIFIER HOUSE, NAIJAUM CROSS ROAD, NEXT TO ROYAL INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, WADA(W), MUMBAI - 400031. AND ALSO HAVING BRANCH OFFICE AT NO 28, 5TH FLOOR, EAST WING, CENTENORY BUILDING, M R ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001 REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, POLICY NO 1405552311005496, VALID FROM 16-09-2015 TO 15-09-2016 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIKHAR AHMED B.,ADVOCATE FOR R1(PH) SRI. D. VIJAYAKUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R2(VK)) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.03.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 40/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, DEVANAHALLI, ENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, DEVANAHALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL) Appeal in M.F.A.No.5156/2021 is filed by respondent No.2-Insurance Company, while M.F.A.No.1593/2023 is filed by the claimants being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 04.03.2021 passed in M.V.C. No.40/2017 on the file of V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bangalore Rural District, Devanahalli. 2. Brief facts of the case leading upto filing of the appeals are that; (a). On 25.08.2016, when deceased Ramaiah was proceeding on his Activa Honda motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-43-S-6766 near 2nd gate of Federal Mogul Factory near Unnikrishna Junction on left side the Doddaballapura-Yelahanka main road, Honda Amaze Car bearing registration No.KA-04- MP-0247 driven by the respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 manner proceeding in the same direction dashed onto the back of the motor cycle being ridden by the deceased. Due to the impact, deceased sustained grievous injuries and he was shifted to Navachethana hospital at Yalahanka New Town for treatment. The deceased got admitted into the said hospital on 25.08.2016 and discharged on 07.10.2016. The deceased had lost the ability of speaking due to the head injury and underwent several medical procedure. He was advised to undergo physiotherapy treatment and speech therapy. He was again admitted for treatment in the same hospital on 06.01.2017, where he died on 20.01.2017. (b). Thereupon the claimants being wife and children of the deceased filed the claim petition under Section 166 of M.V. Act, in M.V.C. No.40/2017 contending that the deceased was hale and healthy prior to the alleged accident and he was earning around Rs.15,000/- per month from agriculture. The petitioners alleged that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the respondent No.1 and therefore, the petitioners sought for compensation of Rs.32,37,557/- from the respondents on different heads. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 3. On service of notice, the respondents entered appearance through their respective counsel and filed their statement of objections by refuting the petition averments. Respondent No.2-Insurance Company even disputed the involvement of the car bearing registration No.KA-40-MP-0247 in the alleged accident. It is also contended that the driver of the offending car did not have valid driving license as on the date of accident. It was contended that there was violation of the terms of policy. Income of the deceased and medical expenditure were also denied. 4. Based on the pleading, the Tribunal framed the following issues: ISSUES 1] Whether petitioners prove that on 25.08.2016, at about 6.00 p.m., when deceased Ramaiah was proceeding on motor cycle bearing No.KA-43-S- 6766 on Doddaballapura-Yelahanka Main Road, near Unnikrishnan Junction, the driver of car bearing No.KA-04-MP-0247 drove it in high speed and rashly and negligently and dashed to the motor cycle resulting fatal injuries to Ramaiah? 2] Whether 2nd respondent proves that owner of the car has violated terms and conditions of insurance policy? 3] Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? 4] What order or award? - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 5. One Sunil Kumar. R-claimant No.4 examined himself as PW-1 and exhibited 18 documents, which are marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.18. On behalf of respondents, respondent No.1 got examined as RW-1 and got marked Ex.R.1 and Ex.R.2. 6. The Tribunal on appreciation of the pleadings and evidence came to the conclusion that the accident in question had occurred resulting in death of the deceased on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending car by respondent No.1. Taking notional income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- per month, adding 10% towards the future prospects and deducting 1/4th of the income towards personal and living expenses and applying multiplier of `9', the Tribunal determined loss of dependency at Rs.8,01,900/-. In addition, the Tribunal awarded Rs.40,000/- towards loss of love and affection, Rs.15,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses and awarded further sum of Rs.50,000/- towards transportation, conveyance, special diet and attendant charges. Though, the claimants claimed that they had spent more than Rs.7,77,557/- towards medical expenses and produced medical bills as per Ex.P13, the Tribunal has held that the claimants are entitled for Rs.4,20,318/- under the head of medical expenses. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 Thus, the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.13,42,218/- with interest at 9% per annum thereon payable by the respondent No.2-Insurance Company. Being aggrieved by the same, the respondent No.2-Insurance Company is before this Court in M.F.A.No.5156/2021 and claimants are before this Court in M.F.A.no.1593/2023 seeking enhancement of compensation. 7. Sri. D. Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2-Insurance Company reiterating the averments and grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal submitted; (a). That the Tribunal grossly erred in attributing negligence to the driver of the car without appreciating the evidence on record. He submits that accident occurred on account of deceased who was riding the scooter having lost the balance and fell into the left side back door of the car due to his own negligence and there was no rash or negligent driving on the part of the driver of the car. He submits that there is no eye witness to the alleged incident, claimant No.4 who has lodged the complaint and at whose instance the charge sheet is filed was not the eye witness. As such the Tribunal could not have relied upon the complaint or the charge sheet to arrive at - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 the conclusion that the accident had occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the car. He submits that contents of Motor Vehicle Accident Report as per Ex.P5 would indicate that the scratch mark on left side of the rear door of the car and on to the right side cover of the scooter. As such the theory of the car hitting the scooter from behind with a high speed is improbable. Thus he submits that the Tribunal failed to consider the case of contributory negligence while attributing negligence on the deceased as well. As such, the respondent- Insurance Company cannot be made liable to make the payment of compensation. (b). He further submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive, the Tribunal ought to have noticed that the claimant Nos.2 to 4 are the major children. Claimant No.2 is a married daughter and residing separately. Claimant No.3 is doing agricultural work and getting income. Claimant No.4 is working in J.P. Morgan and receiving huge salary. None of them are dependant on the deceased. As such, the Tribunal is erred in deducting 1/4th towards personal and living expenses, instead of 1/2. Awarding of amount towards medical expenses was erroneous, inasmuch as the claimants - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 had availed medical reimbursement from ''Medi Assist Healthcare-New India Insurance Company Limited''. He further submits that awarding interest at 9% is also erroneous and contrary to the law. Hence, seeks for allowing of the appeal. 8. Sri. Prabhugoud B. Tumbigi, learned counsel for the claimant Nos.1 to 4 submits that though the deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- per month from his agricultural income, the Tribunal erred in taking only Rs.9,000/- as his monthly income. That the Tribunal erred in not awarding a sum of Rs.7,77,557/- which was spent by the claimants towards medical expenses, instead has awarded only a sum of Rs.4,20,318/- which is inadequate and contrary to the evidence made available on record. That the Tribunal has failed to award any amount towards the conventional heads which is contrary to the settled principles of law. Hence, seeks for enhancement of compensation. 9. Considering the grounds urged in the appeal filed by the Insurance Company and the submissions made in furtherance thereof, the points that arise for consideration are with regard to negligence and quantum of compensation. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 10. It is not in dispute that there is no eye witness to the incident. A case in Crime No.506/2016 is registered upon the complaint filed by claimant No.4. Ex.P3 is the spot mahazar, Ex.P4 is the sketch of the spot, Ex.P5 is the Motor Vehicle accident report. Perusal of Ex.P3 would indicate that both the scooter as well as car were proceeding towards Yelahanka and the scooter was on the left hand side of the said road and the car was on the right hand side of the said road. Damages found on the car as seen at Ex.P5 is the scratch mark on the left side of the rear door and scratch mark on the right side of the side cover of the scooter. It is further seen that both the vehicles did not have any technical defects. 11. Respondent No.1 who was driving the vehicle examined himself as RW.1, paragraph No.4 of his affidavit he has stated that he was driving his car diligently. At paragraph No.5, he has further deposed that the white color Activa Honda motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-43-S-6766 rammed into his vehicle and fell down. In the cross-examination he has denied the suggestion that the accident in question had occurred on account of his rash and negligent driving. Except this, there is no other witness or evidence brought on record by - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 the respondent and Insurance company to attribute any negligence on the part of the deceased. 12. In the charge sheet produced at Ex.P18, the Police have reported that the accident had occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the car. 13. The Tribunal on appreciation of the evidence, at paragraph No.10 of its judgment has come to the conclusion that the driver of the offending car must have driven the same very close to the scooter resulting in the accident. This Court on reappreciation of the evidence and after perusal of the record does not find any reason to differ with the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal. In the absence of any cogent evidence to discredit the evidence available on record, the reasons and conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal attributing negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle are sustained. 14. As regards the compensation is concerned though the claimants have contended that deceased was earning Rs.15,000/- p.m., no evidence in this regard has been produced. The Tribunal has taken the notional income at Rs.9,000/- and in the absence of any documentary evidence, - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority regarding notional income can be followed. needs to be taken into consideration. Since accident is of the year 2016, the notional income of the deceased is determined at Rs.9,500/- p.m. 15. As per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others1 since the deceased was aged about 58 years, 10% of income is to be added towards future prospects. The deceased has left behind four dependents, as such 1/4th of his income is required to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. Thus, the total income of the deceased per annum would be (Rs.9,500 X 10%= Rs.950+Rs.9,500= Rs.10,450 X 3/4= Rs.7837.50 rounded off to Rs.7,838/-. 16. Age of the deceased being 58 years, multiplier `9' is applied. Therefore, loss of dependency would be (Rs.7,838 X 12X9=) Rs.8,46,504/-. 1 AIR 2017 SC 5157 - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 17. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.40,000/- towards loss and affection and Rs.15,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. 18. In terms of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Ltd., vs. Nanu Ram 2 and as clarified by the judgment in the case of United Insurance Company Ltd., Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur and others3, the claimant No.1 being the wife is entitled for loss of spousal consortium of Rs.40,000/-, claimant Nos.2 to 4 being the children are entitled for parental consortium of Rs.40,000/- each. 19. In addition they are also entitled for Rs.15,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. 20. The claim having been made in the year 2016 and an award having been made in the year 2021, amount awarded under the conventional heads is required to be revised at 10% for every block of three years. Since three blocks of three years have been completed, the compensation towards 2 2018 (18) SCC 130 3 AIR 2020 SC 3076 - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 consortium, loss of estate and funeral and transportation expenses shall be escalated by 30%. As such each of the respondents/claimants are entitled for Rs.52,000/- towards consortium and Rs.39,000/- towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. 21. As regards the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company regarding the amount received towards medical reimbursement received by the claimants not having been taken into consideration. It is relevant to refer to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of SEBASTIANI LAKRA AND OTHERS VS. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., AND ANOTHER4 wherein it has held that the amount received by the claimants under the terms of contract of employment cannot be deducted while calculating loss of income, under the compensation payable under Section 168 of the MV Act. Therefore, claimants are also entitled for Rs.7,77,557/- towards reimbursement of medical expenses. Thus, the claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.18,71,061/- as against Rs.13,42,218/- awarded by the Tribunal as under: 4 (2019) 17 SCC 465 - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 Sl.No. Head Amount 1. Towards loss of dependency Rs. 8,46,504 2. Towards loss of consortium Rs.52,000x4 Rs. 2,08,000 3 Towards loss of estate Rs. 19,500 4 Towards funeral expenses Rs. 19,500 5. Towards Medical expenses Rs. 7,77,557 Total Rs. 18,71,061 Less awarded by the Tribunal Rs. 13,42,218/- Enhanced by Rs. 5,28,843/- 22. As regards the rate of interest the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 9% p.a., the same is reduced to 6% p.a. 23. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeals deserves to be allowed in part. Hence, the following: ORDER (i). Appeals are allowed in part. (ii). The impugned award is modified as follows: (1). Claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.18,71,061/- as against 13,42,218/- awarded by the Tribunal. - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC:14287-DB MFA No. 5156 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 1593 of 2023 (2) Respondent No.2-insurer shall deposit the aforesaid amount before the Tribunal on adjusting the amount already deposited if any within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (3) Out of the compensation amount claimants 1 to 4 are entitled to compensation at the rate of 55:15:15:15. Award of the Tribunal with regard to investment and release is maintained. *(4) The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realisation excluding the delayed period of 280 days. Amount in deposit, if any, and trial court records shall be remitted back to the Tribunal forthwith. Sd/- (K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE RL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36 * Inserted vide court order dated 04.07.2025