- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32676-DB MFA No. 3290 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3290 OF 2022 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. BATHULA RAVINDER S/O. LATE B. SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 2. SMT. B. PADMA W/O. BATHULA RAVINDER, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.1-4-27/72/114, BHOLKAPURA, SECUNDERABAD, HYDERABAD, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN-560 080. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K T., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. SANJAY. P. R. S/O. RAGHU. P. M. C/O. SYED ZABIULLA, NO.325/1, SUBHASHNAGAR, NELAMANGALA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, PIN-562 123. 2. M/S. NTR ASSOCIATES Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32676-DB MFA No. 3290 of 2022 NO. 7917, 10TH CROSS, SUBHASHNAGAR, NELAMANGALA, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT-562 123. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., T. P. HUB, 2ND FLOOR, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A.N.KRISHNA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R-3; VIDE ORDER DATED:20.04.2022, NOTICE TO R-1 AND R-2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.12.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.4006/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU SCCH-6, 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 D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and respondents - Insurance Company. 2. Miscellaneous First Appeal No.3290/2022 is filed by the appellants for enhancement of compensation - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32676-DB MFA No. 3290 of 2022 being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the Motor Vehicle Accident claims Tribunal, Bangalore (for short 'the Tribunal') in MVC No.4006/2018 dated 17.12.2021. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to henceforth in terms of their status before the Tribunal. 4. Brief facts of the case is that on 21.06.2018 at 11:15 a.m. when Shri. Bathula Vamshi (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') was riding the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-03-JL-2965 near HP Company, Whitefield, Bengaluru City, at that time, the driver of bus bearing registration No.KA-52-6297 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the deceased, due to which the deceased sustained grievous injuries on vital parts of the body and succumbed to the injuries. Hence, the claim petition was filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32676-DB MFA No. 3290 of 2022 5. Sri. Gurudev Prasad K.T., learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that, the deceased- Bathula Vamshi was aged 25 years and was working as Senior Software Engineer at M/s Visa Consolidated Service India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru and was earning Rs.1,76,000/- per month but the Tribunal has assessed the salary of the deceased at Rs.84,931/- which is on lower side and further contended that the Tribunal has not granted fair and reasonable compensation under conventional heads. Hence, he prays to allow the appeal. 6. Per contra, Sri. A. N. Krishna Swamy, learned counsel for respondent No.3 - Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and submits that considering the material available on record, the Tribunal has granted fair and reasonable compensation under each head which does not call for interference by this Court. He further contended that the employer of the deceased was paying commission - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32676-DB MFA No. 3290 of 2022 on group insurance and hence, the claimants have received a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- under group insurance and the same has to be deducted from the total compensation. With this prayer, he sought for dismissal of the appeal. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the appeal papers including the original records, the point that arise for consideration in this appeal is: Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?” 8. In the instant case, the Insurance Company has not disputed the cause of death, accident, liability to pay compensation. However, the insurance company has disputed the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Insofar as compensation is concerned, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.84,931/- per month which is on meager side. In fact - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32676-DB MFA No. 3290 of 2022 prior to the accident, the deceased was working as Senior Software Engineer at M/s Visa Consolidated Service India Pvt. Ltd., Bengaluru and was earning Rs.1,72,187/- per month as per Ex.P17 to Ex.P20. However, the Tribunal as per Ex.P30 to Ex.P36 has assessed the basic salary of the deceased at Rs.84,931/- and held that remaining amount of Rs.87,256/- was paid towards special allowance. 9. The Tribunal has not considered the special allowance drawn by the deceased which comes to Rs.39,615/-. The same should be added to the basic salary of the deceased. If it is added, the salary of the deceased comes to Rs.1,24,546/-. If 20% is deducted towards income tax for the said sum, it comes to Rs.24,909/-. Hence, the monthly income of the deceased comes to (Rs.1,24,546 - Rs.24,909) = Rs.99,637/- 10. The deceased was aged 25 years at the time of the accident. The respondents have not disputed the work of the deceased and the multiplier applicable for the age of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32676-DB MFA No. 3290 of 2022 deceased is '18'. The deceased died leaving behind his father and mother and therefore, appropriate deductions towards personal expenses would be 50%. The Tribunal has rightly considered the addition of 40% of the deceased and assessed the income towards future prospects. Thus, the 'loss of dependency' is reckoned as under: 99,637+39854.8(40%) = 1,39,492 x 50% = 69,746 69,746 x 12 x 18 = 1,50,65,136/- 11. The Tribunal awarded Rs.25,000/- towards 'funeral and transport expenses', Rs.1,20,000/- towards 'love and affection' and Rs.50,000/- towards 'loss of estate' and the same are fair and reasonable and does not call for interference. 12. Since the claimants have already received compensation from the employer of the deceased in his personal account under group insurance for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-, thus, we are deducting this amount from the total compensation. Hence, the claimants are entitled - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32676-DB MFA No. 3290 of 2022 for total compensation of Rs.1,40,65,136/- as against Rs.1,50,65,136/- with 6% interest per annum, payable within 6 weeks. 13. Thus, the claimant is entitled for the following compensation: HEADS Rs. Loss of dependency 1,40,65,136/- Funeral and transportation expenses 25,000/- Loss of love and affection 1,20,000/- Loss of estate 50,000/- TOTAL 1,42,60,136/- Less: Compensation awarded by the Tribunal 1,30,36,524/- ENHANCED COMPENSATION 12,23,612/- 14. In the result, we pass the following O R D E R i. The appeal is allowed-in-part. ii. The judgment and award dated 17.12.2021 in MVC No.4006/2018 passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated hereinabove. The claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.1,42,60,136/- as against Rs.1,30,36,524/- - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32676-DB MFA No. 3290 of 2022 awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation of Rs.12,23,612/- from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of realisation. iii. Respondent No.3-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation together with interest within six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. iv. Draw modified award accordingly. v. No order as to costs. SD/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE SD/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE RKA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39