- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103142 OF 2016 (MV) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.100034 OF 2015 IN M.F.A. NO.103142/2016 : BETWEEN: 1. SMT. LAXMI W/O. SURESH BANDIVADDAR, AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: HOUSE NO.4825, VADDAR GALLI, GURUWAR PETH, GOKAK, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-591307. 2. KUMARI REKHA D/O. SURESH BANDIVADDAR, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: HOUSE NO.4825, VADDAR GALLI, GURUWAR PETH, GOKAK, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-591307. 3. KUMAR SANTOSH S/O. SURESH BANDIVADDAR, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: HOUSE NO.4825, VADDAR GALLI, GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 GURUWAR PETH, GOKAK, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-591307. 4. KUMAR NAGESH S/O. SURESH BANDIVADDAR, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: HOUSE NO.4825, VADDAR GALLI, GURUWAR PETH, GOKAK, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-591307. 5. SMT. BHIMAWWA W/O. GANAPATI BANDIVADDAR, AGE: 81 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: HOUSE NO.4825, VADDAR GALLI, GURUWAR PETH, GOKAK, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-591307. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI SRINIVAS N. ADVOCATE FOR SRI JAGADISH PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S SHREE GANESH TOURS AND TRAVELS, YADAV NIVAS, OPP. ST STAND, KALHER VILLAGE TAL: BHIWANDI, DIST: THANE, R/BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SRI. SARJERAO DADASAHEB YADAV, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. AMBIKA SADAN NO.11, 145 TAKIYA WARD, LBS MARG, KURLA, MUMBAI-400070 (OWNER OF SWIFT D-ZIRE CAR, BEARING NO.MH-04/ES-7253). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 2. THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MAHADEV PLAZA, CTS NO.10719, SY.NO.135/A, NEAR KOLHAPUR CIRCLE, NEHARU NAGAR, BELAGAVI. (INSURER OF SWIFT D-ZIRE CAR BEARING NO.MH-04/ES-7253 VIDE POLICY NO.1110722338000881, VALID FROM 03/09/2012 TO 02/09/2013) …RESPONDENTS (BY MISS ANUSHA SANGHAMI FOR SRI S.K. KAYAKMATH, ADVOCATES FOR R2; R1-NOTICE HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT BELAGAVI IN M.V.C.NO.1500/2013 DATED 23/10/2014 ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION IN PART AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN M.F.A.NO.100034/2015 : BETWEEN: RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, THOUGH ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MAHADEV PLAZA, CTS NO.10719, SY NO.135/A, NEAR KOLHAPUR CIRCLE, NEHRU NAGAR, BELGAUM NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE, CTS # 172/171, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 V.A. KALBURGI SQUARE, DESAI CROSS, DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBLI. …APPELLANT (BY MISS ANUSHA SANGHAMI FOR SRI S.K. KAYAKMATH, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. SMT. LAXMI W/O. SURESH BANDIVADDAR, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HOUSE NO.4825, VADDAR GALLI, GURUWAR PETH, GOKAK, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. KUMARI REKHA D/O. SURESH BANDIVADDAR, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: HOUSE NO.4825, VADDAR GALLI, GURUWAR PETH, GOKAK, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. KUMAR SANTOSH S/O. SURESH BANDIVADDAR, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: HOUSE NO.4825, VADDAR GALLI, GURUWAR PETH, GOKAK, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI. 4. KUMAR NAGESH S/O. SURESH BANDIVADDAR, AGE: 17 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: HOUSE NO.4825, VADDAR GALLI, GURUWAR PETH, GOKAK, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI. 5. SMT. BHIMAWWA - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 W/O. GANAPATI BANDIVADDAR, AGE: 79 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: HOUSE NO.4825, VADDAR GALLI, GURUWAR PETH, GOKAK, TAL: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI. (SINCE RESPONDENT NO. 4 IS MINOR R/BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.1) 6. M/S SHREE GANESH TOURS AND TRAVELS, YADAV NIVAS, OPP. ST STAND, KALHER VILLAGE, TAL: BHIWANDI, DIST: THANE, REP. BY ITS PROPRIETOR, SARJERAO DADASAHEB YADAV, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. AMBIKA SADAN NO.11, 145, TAKIYA WARD, LBS MARG, KURLA, MUMBAI-400070. (OWNER OF SWIFT D-ZIRE CAR BEARING REGN. NO.MH-04/ES-7253) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SRINIVAS N. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. JAGADISH PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R3 & R5; NOTICE TO R6 IS SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO CALL THE RECORDS, HEAR THE PARTIES, AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.10.2014 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELGAUM IN M.V.C.NO.1500/2013, WITH COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) These two appeals are the outcome of the award that is passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi, in MVC No.1500 of 2013 dated 23.10.2014. 2. While MFA 100034/2015 is filed by respondent No.2 to the claim petition, MFA 103142 of 2016 is filed by the claimants therein. For the sake of convenience of discussion, the contesting parties to the both appeals will hereinafter be referred to as ‘the claimants’ and ‘the insurance company’. 3. Heard Ms. Anusha Sangami, who appears through Video Conference and represents Sri S.K.Kayakamath, learned counsel on record for the insurance company. Also heard Sri Srinivas, who represents Sri Jagadish Patil learned counsel on record for the claimants in both the appeals. 4. As per the submission made by both the learned counsel, these appeals were filed disputing the quantum of amount that is awarded as compensation. While the claimants - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 contend that the compensation granted is on lower side, the version of the insurance company is that the sum awarded is exorbitant. 5. It is not in dispute that the husband of the first claimant, the father of claimants 2 to 4 and the son of the fifth claimant by name Sri Suresh Ganapati Bandivaddar (hereinafter be referred to as “the deceased” for brevity) died in a road traffic accident that occurred in the year 2013. As per the version of the claimants the deceased by attending stone cutting work was earning Rs.10,000/- per month as on the date of accident. However the claimants failed to produce any proof with regard to the occupation and earnings of the deceased as on the date of accident. Perceiving the same, the tribunal took the notional income of the deceased as Rs.7,000/- per month. There is no grievance either for the insurance company or the claimants in that regard. 6. So far as age of the deceased as on the date of accident is concerned, the submission that is made by learned counsel for the insurance company is that the tribunal - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 considered the Aadhar card, which is marked as Ex.P14 and voter identity card, which is marked as Ex.P15 and came to a conclusion that the deceased was aged around 44 years by the date of accident. Learned counsel submits that as per Ex.P12-post mortem report, the age is shown as 46 years and therefore such age should be taken into consideration. 7. On the other hand the submission that is made by learned counsel for the claimants is that the age mentioned in the post mortem report is not conclusive proof and therefore the same should not be considered. Admittedly there is no proof that the required tests were conducted during the post mortem examination to ascertain the age of the deceased. Likewise, even the Aadhar card and voter identity card cannot be taken into consideration to ascertain in exact terms the age of the deceased. In the case on hand as per the post mortem report the age of the deceased is 46 years and as per the Aadhar card and Voter ID his age is 44 years by the date of accident. The Tribunal taking into consideration the approximate age as 44 years by the date of accident applied - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 multiplier ‘14’. In case, 46 years is considered to be the age of the deceased, the multiplier to be applicable is ‘13’. However as there is no authentic proof with regard to the age of the deceased, it cannot be held that the tribunal erred in applying the appropriate multiplier ‘14’ taking the age of the deceased as 44 years. 8. So far as adding of future prospects is concerned, as rightly submitted by learned counsel for the claimants, 25% of the earnings are required to be added as future prospects as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case. However the tribunal added future prospects at the rate of 20% only. Thus taking the notional monthly income as Rs.7,000/-, adding 25% towards future prospects, deducting 1/4th of the earnings towards personal and living expenses, which the deceased would have incurred for himself had he been alive as the dependants are five in number and applying the appropriate multiplier ‘14’, the compensation which the claimants are entitled to under the head ‘loss of dependency’ is as under: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 Notional monthly income Rs.7,000.00 Annual income Rs.84,000.00 Add 25% towards future prospects Rs.1,05,000.00 Deduct 1/4th towards personal and living expenses Rs.78,750.00 Loss of dependency on applying appropriate multiplier ‘14’ Rs.11,02,500/- 9. Thus, the claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.11,02,500/- towards ‘loss of dependency’. Together with the said amount the claimants are entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards ‘funeral expenses’, Rs.15,000/- towards ‘loss of estate’ and Rs.17,000/- towards ‘medical and incidental expenses’. Also the first claimant being the wife of the deceased is entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards ‘loss of spousal consortium’. The claimants 2 to 4 being the children of the deceased are entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards ‘loss of parental consortium’. The fifth claimant being the mother of the deceased is entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards ‘loss of filial consortium’. 10. Thus the total compensation which the claimants are entitled to receive under each head is as under: Heads Amount in Rs. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 Loss of dependency 11,02,500.00 Funeral expenses 15,000.00 Loss of estate 15,000.00 Medical and incidental expenses 17,000.00 Loss of spousal consortium 40,000.00 Loss of parental consortium 40,000.00 Loss of filial consortium 40,000.00 Total 12,69,500.00 11. So far as award of interest on the compensation granted is concerned, learned counsel who represents the insurance company states that the rate of interest should be 6% per annum but the tribunal granted interest at the rate of 9% per annum. The said submission is justifiable. Therefore this Court considers desirable to reduce the rate of interest on the awarded amount from 9% per annum to 6% per annum. Thus both the appeals are disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) Both the appeals are allowed in part. (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi, through orders in MVC 1500 of 2013 dated 23.10.2014 is enhanced from Rs.11,68,000/- to Rs.12,69,500/-. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13819 MFA No. 103142 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100034 of 2015 (iii) The total awarded sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. (iv) As per orders in IA No.1/2016, the claimants are not entitled for any interest on the enhanced sum for the period of delay of 608 days. (v) The insurance company shall deposit entire compensation along with interest within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. (vi) The apportionment made by the tribunal applies to enhanced sum as well. (vii) On deposit, the claimants are permitted to withdraw their respective shares. (viii) Amount if any in deposit, be transmitted to the concerned tribunal immediately. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE EM CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41