- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38927 MFA No. 6860 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6860 OF 2022 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. GEETHA M., W/O LATE MALLESHA M., AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 2. KISHAN M., S/O LATE MALLESHA M., AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS 3. MADEVAPPA S/O KEMPAIAH AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS 4. RATHNAMMA W/O MAHADEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS SINCE 2ND APPELLANT IS MINOR REP. BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT.GEETHA ALL ARE R/AT NO. 107/3 4TH CROSS, JALAHALLI, BENGLAURU -560 013 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. P.MAHADEVASWAMY, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38927 MFA No. 6860 of 2022 AND: 1. VENKATESH S/O DORAISWAMY ‘SANJAYA NILAYA’, 4TH CROSS GANDHI BAZAR SHIMOGA -577 201 2. THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., R.O, 5TH FLOOR, KRUSHI BHAVAN NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE -560 024 3. SIDDAIAH S/O SIDDARAMAPPA NO. 52/3-11, 2ND FLOOR 1ST C MAIN, BAHUBALINAGAR BENGALURU- 560 013. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MOHAN KUMAR T., ADVOCATE FOR R2 V/O/D 01.03.2024- NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O/D 05.11.2024- NOTICE TO R3 HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:18.05.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.6005/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, PRL. MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-1), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38927 MFA No. 6860 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC.No.6005/2019 dated 18.05.2022 by the Court of Small Causes and Member, Principal, MACT, Bengaluru, whereby the Tribunal had fixed the liability at 50% on the Insurance Company and 50% on the owner of the vehicle. The claimants are before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation as well as the apportionment of liability. 2. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.80,00,000/- for the death of the deceased. It is the case of the claimants that on 03.05.2017 at about 11.20 pm., deceased along with others were proceeding in Toyota Innova car on Shimogga-Sagara NH-206 road. The Toyota Innova car was driven by one Madhu. When they were proceeding near Muddinakoppe Tree park, the driver of the lorry loaded with timber without switching on the red lights at the edge of the loaded timber was moving ahead of the Innova car, 3/4th of the said Innova car went inside the timber, consequent to which the inmates of the said Innova car sustained injury and succumbed to injuries on spot. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38927 MFA No. 6860 of 2022 3. The Tribunal on the issue of the negligence had held that there is a negligent act on the part of the driver of the Innova car as well as the driver of the lorry and the composite negligence is fixed at 50% on the driver of the Tata Innova car and 50% on the driver of the lorry. The lorry is insured by the Insurance Company and the Innova car is not insured. Basing on the evidence, the Tribunal had granted the compensation as per the table given below: SL. No. Heads Compensation Awarded by Tribunal 1. Loss of dependency : Rs. 27,84,600/- 2. Towards loss of estate : Rs. 15,000/- 3. Towards funeral expenses : Rs. 15,000/- 4. Towards loss of consortium to claimant No.1 : Rs. 40,000/- 5. Towards loss of consortium to claimant No.2 : Rs. 40,000/- 6. Towards loss of filial consortium to claimant Nos.3 and 4 : Rs. 80,000/- TOTAL : Rs. 29,74,600/- 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants/ claimants submits that as it is a composite case of negligence, both the tortfeasors are jointly and severally liable to pay the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38927 MFA No. 6860 of 2022 compensation, but the Tribunal had held that 50% has to be paid by the Insurance Company and 50% has to be paid by the owner of the vehicle. It is submitted that the claimants are entitled to recover the entire compensation amount from the Insurance Company and the Insurance Company can recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. It is further submitted that the deceased was earning an amount of Rs.60,000/- per month and the Tribunal had taken the income at an amount of Rs.13,000/- per month and it has to be taken at Rs.60,000/- per month. 5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/ Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal had rightly held that the negligence is 50% on the driver of the lorry and 50% on the driver of the Innova car. It is submitted that there is no evidence with regard to the income and in fact the income that is taken is on the higher side i.e., Rs.13,000/- per month instead of Rs.11,000/- per month. In those circumstances, the claimants are not entitled for enhancement of the compensation. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38927 MFA No. 6860 of 2022 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. First coming to the issue of composite negligence, as it is a case of composite negligence, both the parties are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the claimants. In those circumstances, the Insurance Company shall pay the entire compensation amount and they can recover the 50% of the compensation from the owner of the Innova car. 7. Coming to the enhancement of the compensation, this Court had perused the award passed by the Tribunal. Though it is stated that he is earning an amount of Rs.60,000/- per month, except two documents, there is no evidence to substantiate the same. In these circumstances, this Court do not find any reasons to enhance the compensation amount. 8. Accordingly, the appeal of the claimants is partly allowed. i. The entire amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:38927 MFA No. 6860 of 2022 ii. The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Tribunal. iii. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company shall pay the entire compensation amount and it is at liberty to recover 50% of the compensation amount from respondent No.3/owner of the Innova car. iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. On such deposit, the claimants are entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security. v. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. vi. No costs. vii. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN/List No.: 3 Sl No.: 3