- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:587 MFA No. 100017 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.100017 OF 2018 (MV-D) BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI-590002 NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY. …APPELLANT (BY SRI RAJASHEKHAR S.ARANI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. KALAWATI W/O. LANKANNA KHANDEKAR, AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O: KOKATNUR, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591230. 2. KUM. AKILESH S/O. LANKANNA KHANDEKAR, AGE: 4 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KOKATANUR, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591230. 3. KUM. AMRUT S/O. LANKANNA KHANDEKAR, AGE ABOUT 2 YEARS, R/O: KOKATANUR, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591230. Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:587 MFA No. 100017 of 2018 4. SHRI CHIDANAND S/O. NINGAPPA KHANDEKAR, AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: KOKATANUR, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591230. 5. SMT. SIDDAWWA W/O. CHIDANAND KHANDEKAR, AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O: KOKATANUR, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591230. 6. SHRI SANGANGOUDA HUCHAPPAGOUDA NADAGOUDA, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: M/S. NADAGOUDA ROADLINES, STATION BACK ROAD, VIJAYAPURA-586101, (OWNER OF TRUCK BEARING NO.KA28/B 2549. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI HARISH S.MAIGUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI SANTOSH B., ADVOCATE FOR R4 AND R5; NOTICE TO R6 IS SERVED; R2 AND R3 ARE MINORS REP. BY R1) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.09.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.1818/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI AND ETC., THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:587 MFA No. 100017 of 2018 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) Though this appeal is listed for admission, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 2. This appeal is filed under Section-173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘MV Act’ for brevity) by the appellant-Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award dated 21.09.2017 passed by the Court of VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi, in MVC No.1818/2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’), questioning the quantum compensation awarded to the claimants. 3. Heard the arguments and perused the material placed before the Court. 4. Brief facts giving rise for filing of this appeal is that on 11/01/2015 at about 19-35 hours Lankanna S/o Chidanand Khandekar (hereinafter referred to as the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:587 MFA No. 100017 of 2018 ‘deceased’) was proceeding from Kokatnur to Ratnapur on motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-23/Y-3351 in a moderate speed to take back his wife Kalawati. At about 19-35 hours, when the deceased came before 1 km from Telansang cross, on Athani-Bijapur road, at that time one truck bearing registration No.KA-28/B-2549 (hereinafter referred to as the offending vehicle) came with high speed in very rash and negligent manner and took the offending vehicle towards wrong side and dashed to the motorcycle and caused the accident. Due to the impact the deceased sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the accident the deceased was shifted to Government Hospital, Athani then shifted to Wanless Hospital, Miraj for higher treatment. During the treatment at Wanless Hospital, Miraj, the deceased succumbed to the injuries at 04-00 hours on 12/01/2015. Hence, filed the claim petition. 5. The Tribunal has awarded compensation under various heads as under: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:587 MFA No. 100017 of 2018 Sl. No. Heads. Amount in (Rs.) 1. Towards loss of dependency 11,47,500/- 2. Towards loss of consortium 1,00,000/- 3. Towards loss of love and affection 1,50,000/- 4. Towards loss of estate 25,000/- 5. Towards funeral and transportation dead body 25,000/- 6. Towards medical expenses 8,580/- Total: 14,56,080/- 6. The Tribunal committed an error in not awarding compensation under the head of loss of future prospects. There are five dependents, therefore the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of loss of dependency is also on lesser side. Therefore, considering the overall amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, if correct parameters are adopted, then the claimants would have been entitled to enhanced compensation, but the claimants have not preferred appeal. Therefore, though the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on lesser side, but in the absence of appeal by claimants, the same cannot be enhanced. Therefore, the claimant might have satisfied - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:587 MFA No. 100017 of 2018 with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 7. Hence, there is no reason to reduce compensation. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 8. The amount in deposit made by the appellant- Insurance Company shall be transmitted to the Tribunal. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE PMP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 23