- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30201 MFA No. 4114 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4114 OF 2024(MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. GANGAMMA W/O LATE DYAVANNA AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 2. RATHNAKUMARI A. R., D/O LATE DYAVANNA W/O SHNAKAR B. M., AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT ALBURU VILLAGE AND POST, NONAVINKERE, TIPTUR TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 224 AND ALSO AT MALLENAHALLI VILLAGE, KOPPALU POST, TIPTUR TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 224 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. MADHU M. T., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SBI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., GROUND AND 1st FLOOR, RUKMINI TOWERS 3-1 PLATFORM ROAD / RAILWAY APPROACH ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM, Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30201 MFA No. 4114 of 2024 BENGALURU - 560 020 2. SANDEEP B. BADAWADAGI S/O SHARANABASAPPA, AGED MAJOR, R/O 112, 1st FLOOR, MAHAVEER DESIRE-APARTMENT OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, CHIKKABANAVARA, BENGLAURU NORTH BENGALURU - 560 090 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNA REDDY FOR SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATES FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 29.07.2025, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.11.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.2783/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE XIV ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, ACMM AND MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-10), 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 DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30201 MFA No. 4114 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Madhu.M.T, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Sri.Mallikarjuna Reddy who represents Sri.Pradeep.B, learned counsel on record for respondent No.1. 2. Challenge in this appeal is the order that is rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC No.2783/2022 dated 20.11.2023. This is a claimants' appeal. 3. On the ground that the son of the first appellant and the brother of the second appellant by name Lokesh (herein after be referred to as the 'deceased' for brevity) died in a road traffic accident that occurred on 17.03.2022, a petition was filed before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru seeking compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- in total. The Tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum of Rs.17,53,000/- as - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30201 MFA No. 4114 of 2024 compensation. Projecting that they are entitled to a higher sum, the present appeal is filed. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants arguing the matter submits that the deceased as an agriculturist was earning Rs.25,000/- p.m. by the date of accident. However, the Tribunal took the notional income of the deceased as Rs.12,500/- p.m. only and thereby awarded a meager sum as compensation under the head loss of dependency. Learned counsel also submits that the accident occurred in the year 2022 and for the relevant period the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as Rs.15,500/- p.m. for settlement of claims and atleast the said figure should have been considered by the Tribunal. Learned counsel also states that the Tribunal failed to follow the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 while awarding compensation under - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30201 MFA No. 4114 of 2024 the head loss of consortium. Learned counsel thereby seeks for enhancement of compensation. 5. Learned counsel who is representing respondent No.1 though submits that the compensation granted is on proper lines, yet did not dispute the submission that is made by the learned counsel for the appellants regarding taking notional income as Rs.15,500/- p.m. and application of principles laid down in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680. Having taken the notional income as Rs.15,500/- p.m. and without disturbing other parameters i.e., adding 40% towards future prospects, deducting 50% towards the personal expenses which the deceased would have incurred for himself had he been alive and applying appropriate multiplier '16', the compensation which the appellants are entitled to under the head 'loss of dependency' is as under: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30201 MFA No. 4114 of 2024 Notional monthly income Rs.15,500/- Annual income Rs.1,86,000/- Add 40% towards future prospects Rs.2,60,400/- On deducting 50% towards personal and living expenses Rs.1,30,200/- Loss of dependency, on applying appropriate multiplier '16' Rs.20,83,200/- 6. Thus the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.20,83,200/- under the head loss of dependency. 7. Having considered the fact that the accident occurred in the year 2022, by applying the principles laid down in National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, the compensation which the first appellant being the mother of the deceased is entitled to under the head loss of filial consortium is Rs.44,000/-. 8. Thus the compensation which the appellants are entitled to under each heads is as under: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30201 MFA No. 4114 of 2024 Sl. No Description Amount 1 Loss of dependency Rs.20,83,200 2 Loss of filial consortium Rs.44,000 3 Loss of estate Rs.16,500 4 Funeral expenses Rs.16,500 Total Rs.21,60,200 9. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.17,53,000/- only as compensation. However, the justifiable sum which the appellants are entitled to is Rs.21,60,200/-. 10. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru through orders in MVC No.2783/2022 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30201 MFA No. 4114 of 2024 dated 20.11.2023 is enhanced from Rs.17,53,000/- to Rs.21,60,200/-. (iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. (iv) Respondent No.1 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of 8(eight) weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. (v) Out of the enhanced sum, first appellant is entitled to 90% and second appellant is entitled to 10%. (vi) On deposit, the appellants are permitted to withdraw their respective shares. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE NS CT: UR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61