- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:12589 MFA No. 7260 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7260 OF 2015 (MV-D) BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 1ST FLOOR, V.V.ROAD, MANDYA CITY-571 401 BY NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE NO.144, SUBHRAM COMPLEX, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001 BY ITS MANAGER …APPELLANT (BY SRI. O.MAHESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. D.V.PUTTASWAMYGOWDA S/O VENKATARAMANE GOWDA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, 2. NAGARATHNA T.C., W/O D.V.PUTTASWAMYGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, BOTH RESIDENTS OF DEVIHALLY VILLAGE, BELLRU, HASSAN DIVISION KSRTC BUS STAND, HASSAN-573 201 3. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC, HASSAN DIVISION KSRTC BUS STAND, HASSAN-571 401 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B.S.PRSAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2 SRI.G.LAKSHMEESH RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R3) Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:12589 MFA No. 7260 of 2015 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:26.02.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.1325/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, AT NAGAMANGALA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.8,00,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% P.A FROM THE DATE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE PETITIONS. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order passed in M.V.C.No.1325/2013 dated 26.02.2015 by the Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nagamangala, the Insurance Company is before this Court questioning the quantum of compensation granted by the Tribunal. 2. It is the case of the insurance company that in case of death, the Tribunal had granted an amount of Rs.8,000/- towards loss of dependency. The Tribunal had considered Rs.5,000/- as a notional income. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the insurance company submits that considering the future prospects, it is against the ruling of the Larger Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Reshma Kumari and others Vs. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:12589 MFA No. 7260 of 2015 Madan Mohan and another1 wherein it has been held that in the cases where the deceased was self-employed or was on a fixed salary without provision for annual increments, the actual income at the time of death without any addition to income for future prospects will be appropriate. It is stated that the Tribunal when presumed about future prospect of deceased should have equally considered that he would get married in near future and in such an event his alleged contribution apart from increment in his income would be reduced to 1/3rd instead of ½ when being a bachelor. Basing on this learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal ought not to have granted the compensation and it is submitted that the interest that is awarded at 9% per annum is on the higher side and that needs to be reduced. 4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3/KSRTC has also supported the case of the insurance company and submits that the compensation that is awarded by the Tribunal is exorbitant. 12013 AAC 2031(SC) - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:12589 MFA No. 7260 of 2015 5. Learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2/claimants submits that the Tribunal had rightly granted the compensation and no grounds are made out to interfere with the well considered order passed by the Tribunal. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Kajal Vs. Jagdish Chand2 and in other similar cases, Supreme Court had considered income from Rs.10,000/- to 13,000/- per month, while considering the future loss of income in case of accident and in case of death. In this case, the student was studying PUC and considering the future prospects, the Tribunal had taken the income at an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month and granted the compensation. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the insurance company is not tenable in the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in several judgments and this Court finds no force in the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant that the future prospects cannot be considered. Then coming to the rate of interest, the Tribunal had granted interest at 9% per annum. 2 (2020) 4 SCC 413 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:12589 MFA No. 7260 of 2015 As the uniform rate of interest that is granted is 6% per annum, this Court is inclined to reduce interest from 9% to 6% per annum. i. The rate of interest is reduced from 9% to 6% per annum. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the insurance company is Allowed-in-part. ii. The amount in deposit shall be forthwith transmitted to the Trial Court. iii. The insurance company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security. iv. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. v. No costs. vi. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19