- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 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. 3949 OF 2018 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8782 OF 2018 (MV-D) IN MFA No. 3949/2018 BETWEEN: THE MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., SHARADA COMPLEX, OPP. KSRTC BUS STAND, CHITRADURGA TOWN, REPRESENTED BY ITS THE ASST. MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, (TB HUB) NO.44/45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX, 4TH FLOOR, RESIDENCY ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 025. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. POONACHA M U .,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI A R JAGANNATH @ HADAPADA JAGADEESHAPA @ A.R. JAGADEESHA, S/O. REVANASIDDAPPA, Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS 2. SMT. RENUKAMMA W/O. A.R. JAGANNATHA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS 3. SRI. SIDDESH S/O. A.R. JAGANNATHA, AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS RESPONDENT NO.3 IS MINOR RERPESENTED BY HIS FATHER NATURAL GUARDIAN I.E. RESPONDENT NO.3. ALL ARE R/AT KURKE VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK. 4. SRI. PRAKASH S/O. M.K. ANANTHARAJ, MAJOR, M/S. SUGAMA TOURIST OWNER OF BUS BEARING NO. KA-01-C-7353, R/AT. NO. 513, 8TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE - 560 034. 5. SRI. C. SANTHOSH FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, MAJOR, OWNER OF THE BUS BEARING, REGN. NO.KA-01-C-7353, R/AT. NO.320/4, A.V. ROAD, KALASY PALYAM, BANGALORE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. N R RANGE GOWDA ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3; R3 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY R1; V/O DATED 14.08.2019 NOTICE TO R4 AND R5 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.01.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.140/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, HIRIYUR, AWARDING - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 COMPENSATION OF RS.22,52,760/- WITH INTEREST @ 7.5% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN MFA NO. 8782/2018 BETWEEN: 1. A R JAGANNAATH @ HADAPADA JAGADEESHAPPA @ A.R.JAGADEESHA, S/O RAVANASIDDAPPA, NOW AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 2. RENUKAMMA W/O A.R.JAGANNATHA, NOW AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS 3. SIDDESHA S/O A.R. JAGANNATH, NOW AGED ABOUT 14 YEARS, THE APPELLANT NO.3 IS SINCE MINOR, REP BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN FATHER A R JAGANNATH, RESIDING AT KURKE VILLAGE, DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT - 577 599. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. RANGEGOWDA N R .,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI PRAKASH S/O M.K.ANANTHARAJ, AGED MAJOR, MESSRS SUGAMA TOURIST, R/O.NO.513, 8TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 034. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., SHARADA COMPLEX, - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 OPP. KSRTC BUS STAND, B.D.ROAD, CHITRADURGA-577 501. 3. C SANTHOSH AGED MAJOR, R/O NO.320/4, A.V.ROAD, KALASIPALYAM, BANGALORE-560 002. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. POONACHA M U .,ADVOCATE FOR R2)(PH) V/O DATED 26/02/19 NOTICE TO R1 AND R3 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.01.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.140/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDITIONAL MACT, HIRIYUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, 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) These two appeals are filed by the claimants and the respondent-Insurance company against the judgment and award dated 20.01.2018, passed in M.V.C. No.140/2015 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Hiriyur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') by which Tribunal has awarded compensation in a sum of Rs.22,37,760/- payable to - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 the claimants being the legal heirs of one deceased Hanumanthappa. 2. Brief facts of the case leading upto filing of the appeals are that; (a). On 16.04.2014, at about 2.30 a.m., deceased Hanumanthappa along with others was travelling as a passenger in a bus bearing registration No. KA-01-C-7353. On NH-4 road, Hiriyur Taluk. The driver of the said bus drove the same in the rash and negligent manner and lost the control resulting in toppling of the said bus. As a result of which deceased Hanumanthappa sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same on the spot. (b). Thereupon, claimants being his parents and brother filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act seeking compensation in sum of Rs.25,00,000/- contending inter-alia that the deceased was aged about 23 years at the date of accident and working as an Engineer Associate in J.W. Marriott Hotel, Bengaluru earning in a sum of Rs.15,000 per month and that he was contributing his income for his family and that the untimely death of the deceased has caused - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 financial and emotional distress to the claimants/appellants. Hence, seeks for compensation. 3. In response to the notices, respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed statement of objections denying the allegation of accident having occurred due to rash negligent driving of the bus by the driver. The injuries sustained resulting in the death of the deceased is also denied. Respondent No.1 has contended that he was not the owner and permit holder of bus as on the date of accident as the same having been transferred in the name of one Santhosh S/o Chikkasannaiah. However, the policy was taken in the name of respondent No.1 and it was valid as on the date of accident. That if compensation, if any, is required to be paid by the respondent-Insurance company. 4. It is contended by the respondent No.2-Insurance company that the driver of the bus was not possessing valid driving license as on the date of accident. 5. Based on the pleading, the Tribunal framed the following issues: ''1. Whether the petitioners proves that, deceased A.R.Hanumnatha @ Hadapada Hanumanthappa - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 died due to the injuries sustained in a road traffic accident caused on 16-04-2014 at 2.30 a.m. near Habib Solvex NH-4, Hiriyur Taluk Chitradurga District actionable negligence of the driver of Bus bearing No. KA-1-C-7353 ? 2. Whether the respondent No. 2 proves that the deceased did not travel in the said bus on the date of accident? 3. Whether respondent No. 2 proves that the driver of the bus bearing No. ΚΑ-01-C-7353 did not possess valid licence and hence there is violation of policy conditions. ? 4. Whether petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, for what quantum? From whom? 5. What award or decree?'' 6. Claimant No.1/appellant No.1-Sri. A.R. Jagannath, examined himself as PW.4 and common documents have been exhibited on behalf of the claimants. 7. On appreciation of the pleading and material evidence, the Tribunal held that the deceased Hanumanthappa died due to injuries sustained by him in the aforesaid accident on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending bus and consequently held that the claimants being the parents and brother of the deceased are entitled for total compensation of Rs.22,37,760/-. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 8. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and award, the respondent-Insurance Company is before this Court in M.F.A.No.3949/2018 and the claimants are before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation in M.F.A.No.8782/2018. 9. Learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company who is appellant in M.F.A. No.3949/2018, appearing through video conference submitted that the compensation Rs.22,37,760/- awarded by the Tribunal is excessive and exorbitant. The notional income taken by the Tribunal at Rs.11,099/- per month is erroneous. Though salary certificate as per Ex.P26 is produced, the same has not been proved by examining the author of the said document. The Tribunal erred in deducting the income of the deceased towards personal and living expenses at the rate of 1/3 instead of 1/2 as he was a bachelor. Thus, he seeks for reduction of the composition. 10. Learned counsel for the claimants/appellants herein in M.F.A.No.8782/2018 on the other hand submits that the Tribunal erred in assessing the notional income at Rs.11,099/- instead of Rs.15,000/- when document in the nature of Ex.P26 - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 was produced before the Tribunal, the award of compensation under the conventional head is on lesser side and award of interest at the rate of 7.50% instead of 9% is also grossly inadequate. Hence, seeks for enhancement of compensation. 11. Heard both sides and perused the records. 12. Accident in question resulting in the death of the Hanumanthappa, is not in dispute. The only question that requires consideration is with regard to quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 13. It is contended that the deceased Hanumanthappa was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, and in support of the said contentions, Ex.P26-salary certificate has been produced. That apart, Ex.P27 to Ex.P30, which are the marks card and provisional transfer certificate of the deceased have also been produced. The aforesaid documents indicate that the deceased had done diploma in Electrical. Thus, from the said documents it appears that the deceased was possessing technical qualification. Ex.P26-salary certificate would reveal that he was paid Rs.13,990 per month as salary. The Tribunal has however taken income of the deceased at Rs.11,099/- without - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 taking into account of the aforesaid educational qualification of the deceased and the salary being received by him. Which in the considered view of this Court is incorrect and erroneous. Since there are documents to evidence the qualification of the deceased, Ex.P26-salary certificate indicating his income at Rs.13,990 is required to be taken. 14. As per the SSLC marks card produced before the Tribunal along with a memo as per Ex.P27, the date of birth of the deceased was 07.06.1989. The accident in question had occurred on 16.04.2014. Thus the age of the deceased as on that day was 24 years (24 years and 10 months). 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 25 years, addition of 40% of income is to be added towards future prospects. Thus, the total income of the deceased per annum would be (Rs.13,990X 40%= Rs.5,596+Rs.13,990=Rs.19,586 X 12=) Rs.2,35,032/-. 1 AIR 2017 SC 5157 - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 16. The deceased is stated to be a bachelor at the time of accident, as such 1/2 of his income is required to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. The Tribunal has not deducted any amount towards the personal and living expenses. Age of the deceased being 25 years, multiplier '18' is applied. Therefore, loss of dependency would be (Rs.2,35,032X1/2X18=) Rs.21,15,288/-, as against Rs. 22,37,760/- awarded by the Tribunal under this head. 17. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of consortium. 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 Nos.1 and 2 being the parents of the deceased are entitled for loss of parental consortium of Rs.40,000/- each. 18. In addition they are also entitled for Rs.15,000/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses. 2 2018 (18) SCC 130 3 AIR 2020 SC 3076 - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 19. The claim having been made in the year 2015 and an award having been made in the year 2018, amount awarded under the conventional heads is required to be revised at 10% on expiry of every three year. As such, three revisions at 10% for every three years is required to be added towards the compensation under conventional heads. 20. Therefore the respondents/claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation as under: Sl.No. Head Amount 1. Towards loss of dependency Rs.21,15,288/- 2. Towards loss of consortium Rs.1,04,000 3 Towards loss of estate Rs.19,500 4 Towards funeral and obsequies ceremony expenses Rs.19,500 Total Rs.22,58,288/- Less awarded by the Tribunal Rs.22,52,760/- Enhanced by Rs.5,528/- 21. As regards the rate of interest the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a., the same is reduced to 6% p.a. 22. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeals are allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award is modified as follows: - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:14010-DB MFA No. 3949 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 8782 of 2018 ORDER (i). The claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.22,58,288/- with interest thereon at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization; (ii). Respondent No.2/Insurer shall deposit the compensation amount on adjusting the amount, already deposited, if any before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. (iii). Order of the Tribunal with regard to apportionment of compensation amongst the claimants and investment is maintained. (iv). Amount in deposit and the trial Court records shall be transmitted to the Tribunal. In view of disposal of the appeals, I.A.No.1/2025 in M.F.A.No.3949/2018 stood disposed of. RL/- List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12 Sd/- (K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE