- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28920 MFA No. 4689 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4689 OF 2021 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SRI RANGEGOWDA S/O PUTTAHANUMEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 2. SRI SRIDHAR S/O RANGEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS 3. SMT SUMA D/O RANGEGOWDA W/O CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS 4. SMT PAVITHRA W/O CHANDRASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT MOSALE VILLAGE SHANATHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK-573201. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI LOHITHA J N, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI L RAJU S/O NINGASHETTY R/AT OBALAPURA VILLAGE BAGUR HOBLI Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28920 MFA No. 4689 of 2021 CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT – 573201. 2. ICICI LIMBADS MOTOR LIMITED N.R.CIRCLE, HASSAN-573201. REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (V/O. DATED 23.07.2025 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH; SRI.B.C.SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADV. FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN MVC NO.1360/2009 DATED 17.08.2011, PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE & MACT-II AT HASSAN AND PASS AWARD, ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION/MODIFYING JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED IN MVC NO.1360/2009 DATED 17.08.2011, PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE & MACT-II AT HASSAN, ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH COST THROUGHOUT AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEFS AS THIS COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is by the appellants – claimants against the judgment and award dated 17.08.2011, in MVC No.1360/2009, passed by the Addl. District Judge and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28920 MFA No. 4689 of 2021 MACT-II, Hassan, seeking enhancement of the compensation. 2. The parties shall be referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal for easy reference. 3. The appellants / claimants filed a petition under Section – 166 of the MV Act seeking total compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- for the death of Sannamma, who died in a road traffic accident which occurred on 17.01.2009. 4. The date of accident, involvement of the vehicle, death of Sannamma and the liability of the insurance company to pay the compensation are not in dispute. The only dispute is with regard to the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the impugned award. 5. Heard Sri. Lohitha J.N., learned counsel for the appellants and Sri.B.C. Shivanne Gowda, learned counsel for respondent No.2 –Insurance company and perused the records. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28920 MFA No. 4689 of 2021 6. Sri. Lohita J.N. taking this Court through the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and vehemently contended that deceased Sannamma, aged 50 years succumbed to the injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred on 17.01.2009. As per the income fixed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority in respect of the unskilled labours for the year 2009, is at Rs.5,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal has taken the income of deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month, which is on the lower side and the Tribunal has proceeded to deduct 1/3rd towards personal expenses instead of 1/4th in light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of SARLA VERMA AND OTHERS VS. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER1. He further contends that the Tribunal has failed to award adequate compensation under other conventional heads and same requires to be awarded and sought to allow the appeal. 1 2009 ACJ 1298 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28920 MFA No. 4689 of 2021 7. Per contra, learned counsel Sri B.C. Shivanne Gowda opposing the arguments of learned counsel for the appellants submits that deceased is a middle aged lady of 50 years and in the absence of income proof, the Tribunal has properly considered the notional income of the deceased at Rs.3,000/- per month and in view of the fact that the daughters being married they are no more dependents on the deceased, deducted 1/3rd which is just and proper. Sofar as other conventional heads are concerned, keeping in mind the year of accident being 2009, the compensation awarded under the conventional heads are just and proper and accordingly sought to dismiss the appeal. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the record, the only question that arise for consideration of this Court is: Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal befit within the expression just compensation? - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28920 MFA No. 4689 of 2021 9. My answer to the above point is partly in affirmative for the following: REASONS 10. It is not in dispute that the accident has taken place on 17.01.2009 i.e., in the year 2009. As per the income fixed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, under chart is at Rs.5,000/- p.m. for the year 2009, since the deceased being 50 years at the time of death, the applicable multiplier is ‘13’. As per the judgment of NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. PRANAY SETHI2, 10% has to be added towards future prospects taking into consideration the age of the deceased as 50 years at the time of her death in the road traffic accident. In terms of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED V. NANU RAM & OTHERS3 appellants are entitled for filial consortium at the rate of 2 2009 ACJ 1298 3 2018 ACJ 2782 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28920 MFA No. 4689 of 2021 Rs.40,000/- each. There are four appellants and they are entitled for Rs.1,60,000/- under the said head. 11. Further, in view of judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of RASMITA BISWAL & OTHERS VS. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER4, there shall be an enhancement of 10% on the conventional heads for every three years from 2017. Taking into consideration the same, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards ‘loss of consortium’, being Rs.1,60,000/-, the escalation at 10% + 10% works out to Rs.32,000/-. Accordingly, the appellants / claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.1,92,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 4 + 20%) towards ‘Loss Of filial Consortium’. 12. Further, a compensation of Rs.15,000/- each is awarded under the head ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’ respectively, along with 10% + 10% 4 (2022) 2 SC 767 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28920 MFA No. 4689 of 2021 escalation. Therefore, Rs.36,000/- (Rs.15,000 x 2 x 10% + 10%) towards ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’. 13. Thus, in all the appellants/claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation as follows: Heads of compensation Amount Loss of Dependency : Rs. 5,72,000/- Loss of Estate : Rs. 15,000/- Loss of Funeral Expenses : Rs. 15,000/- Loss of Filial Consortium (Rs.40,000 x 4) : Rs. 1,60,000/- 10% escalation for three completed years, 2 times (3 years + 3 years). [Rs.1,60,000+ 30,000 =1,90,000 X 20%] : Rs. 38,000/- TOTAL : Rs. 8,00,000/- 14. The total compensation re-determined by this Court works out to Rs.8,00,000/- as against 3,37,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The appellants – claimants are - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28920 MFA No. 4689 of 2021 entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.4,63,000/- (Rs.8,00,000 – Rs.3,37,000) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. 15. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is Allowed-In-Part; ii) The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in award dated 17.08.2011, in MVC No.1360/2009, passed by the Addl. District Judge and MACT-II At Hassan is modified; iii) The appellants – claimants are entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.4,63,000/- (Rs.8,00,000 – Rs.3,37,000) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization excluding the interest - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28920 MFA No. 4689 of 2021 for the delayed period of 3043 as per order dated 25.07.2025 passed by this Court; iv) The enhanced compensation amount shall be deposited by the respondent No.2 – Insurance company before the Tribunal, within Six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; v) On deposit of compensation amount, the appellant Nos.1 to 4 are entitled for 25% each and the Tribunal shall release entire compensation amount in favour of the appellants as ordered above. vi) No order as to cost. Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE BL List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19