- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6872 OF 2021 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT.PUSHPA S W/O LATE HEMANTHARAJU V AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS 2. KUM. CHINMAY H D/O LATE HEMANTHRAJU V AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS 3. KUM. LAKSHMI H D/O LATE HEMANTHARAJU V AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS 4. SRI VENKATESHAPPA S/O LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS SINCE PETITIONER 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. PUSHPA S ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO. 1324, 5TH CROSS, AMBEDKAR NAGARA ULLAL UPANAGARA, BANGALORE - 56 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE) AND: Digitally signed by KORLAHALLI BHARATHIDEVIKRISHNACHARYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021 1. SRI.NARAYANASWAMY V S/O VENKATASWAMY R/AT NO. 257/12, 4TH MAIN 10TH CROSS, BYRASANDRA JAYANAGAR I BLOCK BANGALORE - 11. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., MOTOR DEALER DIVISION KRISHI BHAVAN 6TH FLOOR HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE - 27. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 24.07.2025, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 24.08.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.4721/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT-3, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the claimants’ being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 24.08.2021 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021 passed by the VII Additional Small Cause Judge and ACMM, Member MACT-3, Bengaluru (for short 'the tribunal') in MVC No.4721/2019, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that one Hemannthraju V. the father of claimant Nos.2 and 3, husband of claimant No.1 and son of claimant No.4, met with an accident on 22.06.2019, at around 05.30 p.m., at Juttanahalli on Magadi-Huliyurdurga road and as a result, he sustained grievous injuries and while undergoing treatment, he succumbed to the injuries. With these reasons, they prayed to award compensation of Rs.60,00,000/-. 4. Respondent No.1 is the owner and respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending vehicle. Both the respondents have appeared and filed their respective written statements denying averments in the claim petition. Respondent No.2 denied its liability to pay the compensation and prayed to dismiss the claim petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021 5. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues, for its determination. 6. The claimants to prove their case examined one witness as PW-1 and marked 21 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-21. Respondents have not led any evidence. 7. The Tribunal, after hearing both the parties and appreciating the materials available on record, awarded the following amount of compensation: Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency 32,13,000/- Loss of estate 15,000/- Towards spousal consortium (for petitioner No.1) 40,000/- Towards parental consortium (for petitioner Nos.2 and 3) 80,000/- Towards filial consortium (for petitioner No.4) 40,000/- Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses 15,000/- Total 34,03,000/- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021 8. Being aggrieved by the said award passed by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 9. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contends that the deceased was a driver-cum-owner of a taxi. He was driving an Uber taxi and earning nearly Rs.1,000 per day. As owner cum driver, he had two sources of income one as a driver and the other as the owner of the taxi. To substantiate the same, the claimants have produced the bank account extract and RC of the vehicle; which was a commercial vehicle. They have also produced the driving licence of the deceased. The Tribunal has not considered these materials and has taken the income as Rs.15,000/- per month. Therefore, it is prayed to take income as prayed for in the claim petition. 10. Learned counsel for respondent No.2-insurer contended that the Tribunal has considered the facts in detail and has rightly held that income of the deceased was Rs.15,000/- per month. This does not call for any interference by this Court. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021 11. The Tribunal has taken notional income of the deceased as Rs.15,000/-per month, added 40% of the income towards future prospects and applied the multiplier as '17'. The claimants have produced the bank account extract of the deceased. It shows that he was receiving the amount from Uber India System. Ex.P.10 is a copy of the driving licence and he had licence to drive three-wheeler non-transport vehicle and light motor commercial vehicle. A copy of the B-register extract is at Ex.P.20. It pertains to the car standing in the name of deceased. The claimants have also produced a certificate issued by the SBI stating that, after the death of Hemanthraju, his legal heirs sold the car and repaid the outstanding loan amount. The said certificate is marked as Ex.P.21. These documents corroborate the evidence of PW.1. Therefore, the Tribunal’s observation that the claimants failed to produce material evidence to prove that the deceased was earning income from operating the taxi is not sustainable. Looking at the above documents as well as Ex.P.19, the income of the deceased can be taken as Rs.18,000/- per month, 40% of the same needs to be added towards future prospects. The applicable multiplier is '17'. The Tribunal rightly deducted 1/4th - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021 towards personal expenses. Accordingly, the claimants were entitled to compensation under the head 'Loss of dependency' at Rs.38,55,600/ (18000+40%x12x17x3/4), as against Rs.32,13,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The claimants are entitled to the following amount of compensation: Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency (18,000+40%x12x17x3/4) 38,55,600/- Loss of estate 15,000/- Towards spousal consortium 40,000/- Towards parental consortium 80,000/- Towards filial consortium 40,000/- Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses 15,000/- Total 40,45,600/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal Enhancement- Rounded off- 34,03,000/- 6,42,600/- 6,43,000/- 12. The claimants are entitled to enhancement of Rs.6,42,600/-, which is rounded off to Rs.6,43,000/-. The claimants are also entitled to interest on the enhanced amount - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021 of compensation at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. 13. Undisputedly, respondents are liable to pay the said amount. 14. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated 24th August 2021, passed in MVC.No.4721/2019, by the VII Additional Small Cause Judge and ACMM, Member MACT-3, Bengaluru, stands modified. iii) The claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.6,43,000/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount, from the date of petition till its realization. iv) The respondent No.2-Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award. v) The rest of the order of the Tribunal with respect to apportionment, deposits and release shall remain unaltered. vi) Draw award accordingly. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:41487 MFA No. 6872 of 2021 Registry is directed to send back the records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9