- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5965 OF 2023 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6944 OF 2023 (MV-D) IN MFA No. 5965/2023 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. HAJIRA BEGUM W/O AZEEZ UDDIN AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS R/AT NO.11, 1ST STAGE GAYATHRIPURAM MYSORE 570 019 2. MR. NASEER UDDIN S/O AZEEZ UDDIN, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT NO.11, 1ST STAGE GAYATHRIPURAM MYSORE 570 019 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.2 2ND FLOOR, 2ND BUILDING SHANKARANARAYAN BUILDING M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE 01 BY ITS MANAGER Digitally signed by SHAKAMBARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 2. MANIPAL HEALTH ENTERPRISES PVT LTD THE ANNEXE, NO.98/2 RUSTOM BAGH ROAD OFF HAL AIRPORT ROAD BANGALORE-560 017 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR D, ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 11.09.2023, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.03.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.730/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL SCJ AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT-3, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 6944/2023 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHAHEEDA BEGUM W/O MOHAMMED ALI, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS R/AT NO 51, 2ND MAIN ROAD, BHARAT MATHA LAYOUT, VENKATESHPURAM, K.G.HALLI, BANGALORE-560 045 2 MR. G.A. MOHAMMED HAROON S/O MOHAMMED ALI, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT NO.44, 6TH CROSS B.M.LAYOUT, VENKATESHAPURAM, K.G.HALLI, BANGALORE-560 045 ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 AND: 1. THE HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.2 2ND FLOOR, 2ND BUILDING SHANKARANARAYAN BUILDING M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE 01 BY ITS MANAGER 2. MANIPAL HEALTH ENTERPRISES PVT LTD THE ANNEXE, NO.98/2 RUSTOM BAGH ROAD OFF HAL AIRPORT ROAD BANGALORE-560 017 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D. VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DT.15.10.2024, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.03.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.641/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL SCJ AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT-3, BENGALURU, 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 MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT These two appeals arise out of the common accident having occurred on 07.01.2020. The claimants before the Tribunal are in appeal seeking enhancement due to the inadequate compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru in MVC.No.641/2020 and MVC.No.730/2020 dated 15.03.2023. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: On 07.01.2020 at about 6.30 p.m, when Mohammed Mansoor was riding a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-04-JH-9546 along with his friend namely Ibrahim Khalil Ulla, as a pillion rider and when he reached near Srinivagilu Junction, Inner Ring Road, Bengaluru, at that time an ambulance bearing registration No.KA-03-AB-7687 came in a rash and negligent manner on restricted one way and dashed against the motorcycle ridden by the deceased Mohammed Mansoor. Due to the occurrence of the accident both the rider and the pillion rider fell down, - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. 3. It is the claim of the claimants in both cases that the deceased were working in a private firm and hale and healthy and due to the accident, the claimants have lost their loved ones, who were the only source of livelihood. Therefore, the financial source of their family is curtailed/diminished. Hence, they filed two claim petitions claiming compensation against the respondent. 4. On consideration of the material placed before the Court, the Tribunal granted total compensation of Rs.54,69,268/- in MVC.No.730/2020 and awarded Rs.21,40,600/- in MVC.No.641/2020. 5. Being aggrieved by the inadequate compensation awarded, the claimants in both the cases are before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. 6. It is the vehement contention of learned counsel for the claimants in both the cases that the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 compensation awarded is on the lower side and the Tribunal has not taken into consideration the handicap brother in the case of MVC.No.730/2020 i.e., brother of deceased Ibrahim Khalil Ulla and thereby instead of taking the deduction as 1/3rd has deducted 50% towards personal and living expenses, which is erroneous. Same requires to be enhanced considerably by taking personal expenses deduction as 1/3rd rather than 50%. 7. It is also contended that on the consortium also the Tribunal has failed to award just and reasonable compensation. Hence seeks enhancement. 8. In the case of Mohammed Mansoor in MVC.No.641/2020, it is contended by the learned counsel for the claimants that the Tribunal failed to take into consideration the salary slips and bank statement produced wherein a salary is more than Rs.15,000/- to almost Rs.20,000/- on different occasions along with incentives, which has been ignored and not taken into consideration and the Tribunal has taken notional income - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 of Rs.14,500/- which is erroneous and hence requires to be increased to the salary which the deceased was drawing which has been produced by way of documents, rather than adopting notional income of Rs.14,500/- per month. Under these grounds he seeks enhancement of compensation by allowing the appeal. 9. Per contra learned counsel D Vijayakumar, representing for the insurance company vehemently objects to the arguments put forth by the learned counsel for the claimants and contends that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is just and reasonable. The tribunal has taken into consideration all the material placed before the Court, the question awarding higher compensation does not arise as the compensation awarded is in fact exorbitant. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the insurance company that deduction of 50% in both the cases as both the deceased were bachelors at the time of occurrence of accident is correct, same does not call for interference. It is also contended by him that - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 in view of there being no proper salary certificates and an authorized person to speak about the salary, the tribunal has adopted notional income of Rs.14,500/- which is correct and does not call for interference and all other heads the tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation which is does not call for interference. 10. Heard learned counsel or the appellant/claimants and learned counsel for the respondent-insurance company. 11. The occurrence of the accident and involvement of the vehicle the death having occurred due to the road traffic accident all are proved and established by production of Exs.P1 to P9, which are police record, the same however are not disputed or questioned in any Court. Therefore, negligence is rightly attributed against the driver of the Ambulance- offending vehicle. 12. Coming to the question of age, avocation and income in the case of MVC No.730/2020 the age of the deceased as on the date occurrence of the accident was 30 years. The appropriate multiplier is taken as 17 which is - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 correct and does not call for interference. With regard to the income based on the documents produced at Exs.P28, 29, 33 to 37, 40 & 41 the tribunal has assessed the income to be Rs.37,819/- and it is rounded up to 37,810/- per month. The tribunal has granted 40% future prospects considering the age of the deceased is justified which also does not call for interference. The question is whether the claimants deserve enhancement of compensation to the extent of personal living expenses to be taken at 1/3 or 50%. To this point answer in my opinion would be 50% as the tribunal as rightly assessed the deceased to be bachelor as on the date of occurrence of accident. No doubt the brother of the deceased one of claimant is handicapped but nothing is produced to show that the deceased was contributing to the handicapped brother to any extent. This court is not inclined to deduct personal expenses as 1/3 what is taken by the tribunal is retained as 50% towards the personal and the living expenses. For the loss of dependency of Rs.53,99,268/- stands intact and is not interfered. Towards the loss of estate - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 Rs.15,000/- and transportation of dead body, funeral expenses Rs.15,000/- is retained, towards the consortium the tribunal has awarded Rs.40,000/- additional Rs.40,000/- is awarded as there are two claimants and the second claimant is handicapped requires to be taken care, accordingly additional Rs.40,000/- is added. Therefore the total compensation in this case would be Rs.55,09,268/-. An additional 10% requires to be granted towards escalation on the consortium of Rs.8,000/- is added further under this head, hence in all it would be Rs.55,17,268/- 13. In the case of MVC No.641/2021 the age of the deceased as on occurrence of accident is 28 years the multiplier is adopted 17 is correct, does not call for interference. The tribunal was granted 40% towards future prospects which also does not call for interference. Only point for the consideration in this case would be is to whether the salary i.e., documents produced requires to be taken on the documents produced by the claimants, which is seen that the salary is not constant and it is - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 varying from the documents produced by the claimants raising from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.19,000/- from the year 2016 to the year 2019, but the fact remains that the deceased was employed in private firm in Sultan diamonds, pay slips and other documents have been produced, the tribunal has taken notional income of Rs.14,500/- per month. In my opinion notional income has to be taken where there is absolutely no proof of income. In the present case on hand, several documents are produced like pay slips, bank salary statement of the deceased income raising Rs.15,000/- to Rs.19,000/- from the year 2016 to 2019. Under this circumstances, this Court in inclined to enhance and take the income at Rs.15,500/- instead of Rs.14,500/- taken by the tribunal. Marginal increase is made as there is no static income hence without taking into the consideration the incentives the salary is taken as Rs.15,500/-. Under the circumstances, the loss of dependency would be Rs.15,500/- + 40% = Rs.21,700/- and 50% deduction Rs.21,700 X50/100 = Rs.10,850, and Rs.10,850 X 12 X - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 17= Rs.22,13,400/- would be the loss of the dependency as against Rs.20,70,600/-. Towards the loss of estate, funeral expenses there is no call for interference is called for same is retained as Rs.15,000/- each. Towards consortium the tribunal is awarded Rs.40,000/-, there are two claimants each should be entitled to Rs.40,000/- per head, additional Rs.40,000/- is awarded under this head and 10% escalation Rs.8,000/- added. In view of the above discussion, the claimants would be entitled total compensation of Rs.23,31,400/- as against Rs.21,40,600/- in view of the above discussions, I pass the following: :ORDER: i) The appeals are allowed-in-part; ii) The judgment and award dated 15.03.2023 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and Small Causes, Bengaluru in MVC.Nos.641/2020 and 730/2020 is modified; iii) The claimants in MVC No.730/2020 would be entitled to a sum of Rs.55,17,268/- as - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:902 MFA No. 5965 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 6944 of 2023 against Rs.54,69,268/- awarded by the tribunal along with interest 6% p.a; iv) The claimants in MVC No.641/2020 would be entitled to a sum of Rs.23,31,400/- as against Rs.21,40,600/- awarded by the tribunal along with interest 6% p.a; v) The balance compensation amount shall be paid by the respondent/insurance company 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 upon proper verification; vii) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal shall stand intact; viii) The original records shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional tribunal forthwith. ix) Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE AM/ASN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27