- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8074 MFA No. 1711 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1711 OF 2024 (MV-D) BETWEEN: THE MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE, NO.28, EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. NOW REP. BY MANAGER, LEGAL. …APPELLANT (BY SRI ASHOK N PATIL, ADVOCATE [PH]) AND: 1. SMT. SUGANTHA DEVI, W/O LATE BABU R, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS. 2. SANDHYA B, D/O LATE BABU R, AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS. 3. GAGAN B, S/O LATE BABU R, AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS. 4. HASHINI B, D/O LATE BABU R, AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS. Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8074 MFA No. 1711 of 2024 (SINCE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 ARE MINORS REP. BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER 1ST RESPONDENT) RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO 4 ARE R/AT NO 587, 175/1, 2ND MAIN ROAD, 6TH CROSS, NEAR SHANIDEVARA TEMPLE, MUNESHWARA LAYOUT, LAGGERE, BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU CITY-560 058. 5. SMT. GOWRAMMA, W/O LATE RAJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO 586, 6TH CROSS, MUNESHWARA LAYOUT, LAGGERE, BENGALURU-560 058. 6. SRI GOWTHAM M, S/O MANJUNATHA H, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/AT NO.2/40, 1ST CROSS, BYRAVESHWARA NAGARA, LAGGERE, PEENYA SMALL INDUSTRIES, BENGALURU CITY-560 058. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RANGEGOWDA N R, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-5 [PH]; R-2 TO R-4 ARE MINORS REP. BY R-1; NOTICE TO R-6 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED 13.11.2024) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.10.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.4264/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE, ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU SCCH- 13, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.33,40,900/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8074 MFA No. 1711 of 2024 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed by the Insurer challenging the judgment and award dated 18.10.2023 passed in MVC No.4264/2021 on the file of II Additional Judge and ACMM, Court of Small Causes and Member, MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-13)1, wherein the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is challenged as being excessive. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. The factual matrix in a nutshell leading to the present appeal is that on 04.10.2020, when one Babu was riding as a Pillion rider on motorcycle bearing No.KA-02- KE-5094, the rider of the said motorcycle rode the same in a rash and negligent manner causing the accident in 1 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’ - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8074 MFA No. 1711 of 2024 question, as a result of which, the said Babu2 sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same in the hospital. Claiming compensation for the death of the deceased, his wife, children and mother filed a claim petition arraying the owner and insurer of the lorry as respondent Nos.1 and 2 before the Tribunal. The claim proceedings were contested by respondent No.2/Insurer. The Tribunal by its judgment and award dated 18.10.2023, partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a total compensation of `33,40,900/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum and directed respondent No.2/Insurer to pay the compensation awarded. 4. Being aggrieved, the Insurer has filed the present appeal challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The finding of the Tribunal on negligence and liability has not been challenged and the same has attained finality. 2 Hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased' - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8074 MFA No. 1711 of 2024 5. Heard submissions of Sri.Ashok N. Patil, learned counsel for the appellant/Insurer and Sri.N.R.Rangegowda, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5/claimants. 6. The sole contention put forth by the appellant/Insurer is that the Tribunal has assessed the age of the deceased as 30 years and applied the multiplier of 17. It is contended that the date of birth of the deceased is 13.11.1989 as per the Aadhar Card (Ex.P9) and having regard to the same, the multiplier required to be adopted. 7. Learned counsel for respondents/claimants contends that although the multiplier adopted is on the higher side, the total compensation awarded is just and proper and in accordance with law and seeks for dismissal of the above appeal. 8. It is forthcoming that the Tribunal has noticed that the date of birth of the deceased was 13.11.1989 as per the Aadhar Card (Ex.P9). Considering the same, the age was assessed as 30 years and the multiplier adopted - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8074 MFA No. 1711 of 2024 was 17. The said finding of the Tribunal is ex facie erroneous inasmuch as the deceased having been born on 13.11.1989 and the accident having occurred on 04.10.2020, as on the date of the accident, the deceased was aged 31 years 10 months and 27 days. Hence, the multiplier that ought to have been adopted is '16'. 9. Since the claimants have not produced any documents to prove the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has assessed the notional income of the deceased as `14,500/- which is just and proper. Further, the Tribunal has taken the future prospects as 40% in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS3 and deducted 1/4th towards 'personal expenses', having regard to the fact that the deceased was survived by 5 dependents, who are the claimants namely the wife, three children and mother of the deceased. Hence, the Tribunal was justified in 3 AIR 2017 SC 5157 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:8074 MFA No. 1711 of 2024 assessing the income for the purpose of calculation of 'loss of dependency' as `15,225/- p.m. Accordingly, the 'loss of dependency' is re-assessed at `29,23,200/- (`15,225/- X 12 X 16) as against `31,05,900/- assessed by the Tribunal. 10. The Tribunal has awarded compensation towards 'loss of consortium' to each of the claimants in a sum of `40,000/-, having regard to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. NANU RAM ALIAS CHUHRU RAM AND OTHERS4. However, the Tribunal has failed to notice that in terms of judgment in the case of MAGMA3, 10% escalation also ought to have been awarded. Hence, the 'loss of consortium' is reassessed at `2,20,000/- (`44,000/- X 5) as against `2,00,000/- assessed by the Tribunal. 4 (2018) 18 SCC 130 - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:8074 MFA No. 1711 of 2024 11. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of `20,000/- towards 'loss of estate' and `15,000/- towards 'funeral expenses'. However, having regard to the judgment in the case of MAGMA3, the compensation under the said heads is required to be awarded in a sum of `15,000/- each with 10% escalation. Hence, a sum of `16,500/- each is awarded for the same. 12. Accordingly, the total compensation under various heads is re-assessed as follows: Sl. No. Heads Amount awarded by the Tribunal (in `) Amount awarded by this Court (in `) 1 Loss of dependency 31,05,900/- 29,23,200/- 2 Loss of consortium 2,00,000/- 2,20,000/- 3 Loss of estate 20,000/- 16,500/- 4 Transportation of dead body, funeral and obsequies expenses 15,000/- 16,500/- Total 33,40,900/- 31,76,200/- - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:8074 MFA No. 1711 of 2024 13. The total compensation is reassessed to `31,76,200/- as against `33,40,900/- as assessed by the Tribunal. Hence, the compensation is required to be reduced by a sum of `1,64,700/- (`33,40,900 - `31,76,200). 14. In view of the aforementioned, the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part; ii) The judgment and award dated 18.10.2023 passed in MVC No.4264/2021 on the file of II Additional Judge and ACMM, Court of Small Causes and Member, MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH- 13), is modified only to the extent of holding that the claimants are entitled to a total compensation of `31,76,200/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The award of the Tribunal in all other aspects remains unaltered and is affirmed. iii) The amount deposited by the appellant together with records be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:8074 MFA No. 1711 of 2024 iv) The appellant-Insurer shall deposit the remaining compensation if any, together with accrued interest within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and the same shall be disbursed to the claimants in terms of the judgment and award of the Tribunal. v) The Registry to draw the modified award accordingly. vi) No costs. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE NR/- List No.: 38 Sl No.: 13