- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8672-DB MFA No.7331/2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7331/2013 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SRI RAJARAM S/O KANDA SWAMY AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS R/AT NANDA GOKULA NEHARUNAGAR, KABAKA VILLAGE PUTTUR TALUK, D K DISTRICT 2. SMT THARA JYOTHI W/O SRI RAJARAM AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS R/AT NANDA GOKULA NEHARUNAGAR, KABAKA VILLAGE PUTTUR TALUK, D K DISTRICT 3. NANDITHA D/O SRI RAJARAM AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS R/AT NANDA GOKULA NEHARUNAGAR, KABAKA VILLAGE PUTTUR TALUK D K DISTRICT- 574 203 … APPELLANTS (BY SMT.HALEEMA AMEEN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI D VENKATRAMANA GOWDA S/O NARAYANA BHAT GHATE AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS R/AT GHATE DOOMADKA HOUSE Digitally signed by K S RENUKAMBA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8672-DB MFA No.7331/2013 IRDE VILLAGE, PUTTUR TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA – 574 201 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. BRANCH OFFICE: PRABHU BUILDING MAIN ROAD, PUTTUR TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA – 574 201 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. L SRIKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR 2; R1 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.03.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.1738/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, PUTTUR, D.K., PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL AND HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL) Questioning the adequacy of compensation awarded to them, claimants in MVC No.1738/2007 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Puttur have preferred this appeal. 2. Appellants were claimant Nos.1 to 3 and respondents were respondent Nos.1 and 2 in MVC No.1738/2007 before the Tribunal. For the purpose of - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8672-DB MFA No.7331/2013 convenience, the parties are referred to henceforth according to their ranks before the Tribunal. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: Claimant Nos.1 and 2 are the parents of Naveen R and claimant No.3 is his sibling. When Naveen R was traveling on motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-12/J-9088 as pillion rider near Ganesh Bagh of Kabaka village, motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-21/E-6543 hit Naveen’s motor cycle, due to the injuries suffered in the accident Naveen died and rider of the said motor cycle suffered injuries. At the time of the accident respondent Nos.1 and 2 were owner and Insurer respectively of the motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-21/E-6543. 4. Claimants filed MVC No.1738/2007 and the rider of the motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-12/J-9088 filed MVC No.1525/2010 against the respondents claiming that the accident, consequential death of Naveen and injuries to the rider of motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-12/J-9088 occurred due to the actionable negligence on the part of the rider of the motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-21/E-6543. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8672-DB MFA No.7331/2013 5. Claimants in MVC No.1738/2007 contended that the deceased was aged 21 years. He was managing his father’s establishment by name M/s.Swamy Engineering Works and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. They further contended that they were depending on his income and due to his death they have suffered damages and respondents are liable to compensate the same. 6. Respondents contested the petition denying negligence on the part of the rider of the motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-21/E-6543, age, occupation and income of the deceased and their liability to pay the compensation. Tribunal consolidated both claim petitions, recorded common evidence and on hearing the parties by the impugned award Tribunal held that the accident and death of Naveen occurred due to the actionable negligence on the part of rider of the motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-21/E-6543. 7. Tribunal considered the age of the deceased as 21 years, notionally assessed his income at Rs.4,500/- per month, deducted 50% of the same for his personal expenses. Further considering the age of the claimant No.2/mother of the - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8672-DB MFA No.7331/2013 deceased as 46 years, applied split multiplier of 13 and awarded compensation of Rs.3,51,000/- on the head of loss of dependency. Tribunal in all awarded Rs.4,25,940/- on different heads payable by respondent No.2/Insurer as follows: Sl. No. Particulars Compensation awarded in Rs. 1. Loss of dependency 3,51,000/- 2. Loss of love & affection 20,000/- 3. Transportation & funeral expenses 20,000/- 4. Loss of estate 20,000/- 5. Medicine 14,940/- Total 4,25,940/- 8. In MVC No.1525/2010 Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.43,600/- to the injured/rider of the motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-12/J-9088 payable by the respondents. 9. Respondents have not challenged the findings of the Tribunal either on the question of negligence or on the question of quantum compensation. Therefore, the impugned award has become final as against the respondents. Appellants questioning the adequacy of compensation and application of multiplier of 13 have filed the above appeal. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8672-DB MFA No.7331/2013 10. As already noted, the finding of the Tribunal regarding negligence on the part of the motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-21/E-6543 owned and insured by the respondent Nos.1 & 2 respectively, the age of the victim etc have become final. The Tribunal held that the deceased was aged 21 years, notionally assessed his income at Rs.4,500/- for which the appellant has no grievance. Tribunal instead of considering the age of the deceased has considered the age of claimant No.2/mother to apply multiplier which is contrary to the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in R.Valli & Ors. vs. Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation1 and National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi2. In those judgments relying on earlier judgment in viz., Sarla Varma v. Delhi Transport Corporation3 the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the multiplier applied in such cases should be based on the age of the victim. Therefore, applicable multiplier is 18. 11. As per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi’s case referred to supra and having regard to the occupation of the deceased, 40% has to be super added by 1 (2022) 5 SCC 107 2 AIR 2017 SC 5157 3 AIR 2009 SC 3104 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:8672-DB MFA No.7331/2013 way of future prospects. Since deceased was unmarried, 50% has to be deducted for his personal expenses. Therefore, compensation payable on the head of loss of dependency is (Rs.4,500 + 40% of 4500 = 6300/-, 50% of 6,300=3150 X 12 X 18 =) Rs.6,80,400/-. The compensation awarded on the head of medical expenses is based on records, that needs to be maintained. 12. As per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi’s case claimant Nos.1 and 2 are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each on the head of loss of consortium with escalation of 10%. Similarly on the conventional heads of funeral expenses and loss of estate they are entitled to Rs.15,000/- + Rs.15,000/- with escalation 10%. Therefore, just compensation is as follows: Sl. No. Particulars Compensation awarded in Rs. 1. Loss of dependency 6,80,400/- 2. Medicine 14,940/- 3. Loss of consortium 88,000/- 4. Loss of estate 16,500/- 5. Funeral expenses 16,500/- Total 8,16,340/- Less awarded by the Tribunal 4,25,940/- Enhanced compensation 3,90,400/- - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:8672-DB MFA No.7331/2013 13. Respondent No.2/Insurer is liable to pay compensation with interest at 6% per annum till its realization. Hence the following: ORDER i) Appeal is partly allowed. ii) Appellants/claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.3,90,400/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. iii) Respondent No.2/Insurer shall deposit the said amount before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. iv) On such deposit, Tribunal shall release 30% of the said compensation to claimant No.1 and 70% to claimant No.2 digitally on furnishing required documents. v) Registry shall transmit the TCRs to the Tribunal forthwith. Sd/- (K.S.MUDAGAL) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE AKC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30