- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102799 OF 2016 (MV-D) C/W MFA CROSS OBJ NO.100034 OF 2019 IN M.F.A. NO.102799 OF 2016 BETWEEN: M/S. BHARTI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BY ITS MANAGER, 1ST FLOOR, FERNS ICON, SURVEY NO.28, DODDANAKUNDI, BENGALURU, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, BHARTI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE, 1ST FLOOR, FERNS/SY NO.28, DODDA NEKUNDI, BENGALURU-37. …APPELLANT (BY SRI S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. KIRAN SINGH W/O. LATE DHANUNJAYA KUMAR SINGH, AGE: 33 YEARS, HOUSE WIFE, SINCE DECEASED BY HER LR’S 2. MINOR AADITYA ANURANG S/O. LATE DHANUNJAYA KUMAR SINGH, AGE: 11 YEARS, 3. MINOR ANUSHA SINGH D/O. S/O. DHANUNJAYA KUMAR SINGH, THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS, REPRESENTED BY THEIR Digitally signed by V N BADIGER Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 GUARDIAN MATERNAL GRAND FATHER SURENDRA SINGH S/O. CHANDRADEV SINGH ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF H.NO.G1/4, SHANKAR GUDDA COLONY, THORANAGAL IN SANDUR TALUKA, NOW AT GANDHI NAGAR, BALLARI-583101. 4. N. SUBRAMANI S/O. N. HANUMANTHAPPA, AGE: 37 YEARS, DRIVER OF LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KA-34/B-1205, R/O. SWAMY HALLI VILLAGE, IN SANDUR TALUK OF BALLARI DISTRICT-583101. 5. M. JAYA S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA, AGE. 44 YEARS, OCC. OWNER OF LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KA-34/B-1205, R/O. Y. KAGGAL VILLAGE, IN BALLARI TALUK-583101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI Y.LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3; NOTICE TO R4 IS SERVED; R5-SERVICE OF NOTICE DISPENSED WITH) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO, ALLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.03.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.13/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XII, BALLARI, WITH COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN MFA CROSS OBJ NO.100034 OF 2019 BETWEEN 1. SMT. KIRAN SINGH W/O. LATE DHANUNJAYA KUMAR SINGH, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 1A. 1B. SURENDRA SINGH S/O. CHANDRA DEV RAI, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, R/O. VILLAGE JAMUA-1 DISTRICT TEHSIL, BALLIA-277001, (UTTAR PRADESH). MANORAMA SINGH W/O. SURENDRA SINGH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/O. VILLAGE JAMUA-1 DISTRICT TEHSIL, BALLIA-277001, (UTTAR PRADESH). 2. MINOR AADITYA ANURANG S/O. DHANUNJAYA KUMAR SINGH, AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS, 3. MINOR ANUSHA SINGH D/O. DHANUNJAYA KUMAR SINGH, THE PETITIONERS NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS, REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER SMT. KIRAN KUMAR SINGH, ALL ARE R/O. H.NO. G1/4, SHANKAR GUDDA COLONY, THORANAGAL IN SANDUR TALUK, NOW R/O. GANDHI NAGAR, BALLARI-583101. ...CROSS OBJECTORS (BY SRI Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND 1. N. SUBRAMANI S/O. N. HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, DRIVE OF THE LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION. NO.KA-34/B-1205, R/O. SWAMYHALLI VILLAGE IN SANDUR TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT-583101. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 2. M. JAYA S/O. HANUMANTHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING REGN. NO.KA-34/B-1205, R/O. Y. KAGGAL VILLAGE IN BALLARI TALUK. 3. M/S. BHARATI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BY ITS MANAGER, 1ST FLOOR, FERNS ICON, SURVEY NO.28, DODDANAKUNDI, BENGALURU. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS MFA CROSS OBJ IN MFA NO.102799/2016 IS FILED UNDER ORDER XLI RULE 22 OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE R/W SECTION 173(1) OF M.V. ACT, 1998, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.03.2016 BEFORE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XII, AT BALLARI, IN MVC NO.13/2015, BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AND AWARDING A TOTAL COMPENSATION OF RS.63,80,000/- AND ETC.,. THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL AND MFA CROSS OBJ, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA) The above appeal and cross objection are filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 19881, calling in question the judgment and award dated 30.03.2016, passed in MVC No.13/2015, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-XII, Ballari2. 2. The parties will be referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal, for the sake of convenience. 3. The facts in a nutshell leading to the present appeal are that on 20.09.2014, one Dhanunjaya Kumar Singh S/o Kasinath Singh3, who was working as Supervisor in Commercial Department, Neha Contractions Pvt Ltd., was riding the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA.35/S.3512. When he reached in front of Energy Gate, By-pass road in Thoranagal RS of Sandur Taluka, at that time, a lorry bearing registration No.KA.34/B.1205, came with a high speed, in a rash and negligent manner and hit the motorcycle, which the deceased 1 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘M.V. Act’ 2 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’ 3 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’ - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 was riding from behind, causing the accident in question, due to which, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. Claiming compensation for the death of the deceased, his wife and children instituted the claim proceedings, arraying the driver, owner and insurer of the lorry as respondents No.1 to 3 respectively. 4. The respondents No.1 and 2 entered appearance through a counsel, but no statement of objections are filed. The respondent No.3/insurer filed statement of objections and contested the claim proceedings. The clamant No.1, wife of the deceased, was examined as PW.1 and the representative of the employer of deceased was examined as PW.2. Ex.P1 to Ex.P9 were marked in evidence. No oral or documentary evidence were adduced on behalf of the respondents. 5. The Tribunal, by its judgment and award dated 30.03.2016, partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a compensation of ₹23,43,840/- together with interest at 7% per annum. The Tribunal held that the respondents No.1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation, and the respondent No.3/insurer was directed to deposit the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 compensation awarded. Being aggrieved, the insurer has preferred the appeal and the claimants have preferred the cross-objection. 6. Heard submissions of learned counsel Sri. S.K. Kayakamath for the insurer and learned counsel Sri. Y Lakshmikant Reddy for the claimants. 7. It is the primary contention of learned counsel for the insurer that the claimants have also preferred ECA No.40/2015, on the file of Senior Civil Judge Cum Member VI-MACT, Kudligi, wherein, a compensation of ₹8,26,098/- together with interest at 12% per annum was awarded. Being aggrieved by the same, MFA No.102960/2016 has been filed. It is further contended that the representative of the insurer, who was examined as PW.2 in the claim proceedings, has deposed that the deceased was working as Supervisor in Commercial Department, Neha Contractions Pvt Ltd., and was drawing a salary of ₹25,000/- per month. However, PW.2 has also adduced evidence in ECA No. 40/2015, wherein, he has deposed that the deceased was paid of ₹340/- per day. Hence, it is contended that the judgment and award of the Tribunal is - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 an outcome of fraud and perjury. Thus, learned counsel seeks for allowing of the appeal and setting aside the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimants contends that the claimants have filed an affidavit that they would not peruse the proceedings in ECA No.40/2015 and they were not claiming compensation awarded in the said proceedings. Hence, it is contended that the present claim proceedings are required to be adjudicated upon its merits. It is further contended that the claimants being unaware of the legal proceedings after the death of deceased, has unknowingly filed two proceedings and there is no malicious intent in the same. It is further contended that the representative of the insurer, who was examined as PW.2 in the claim proceedings, has deposed in both the proceedings, which is required to be considered and adequate compensation be awarded. It is further contended that the quantum of compensation awarded is on the lower side and the same is required to be enhanced. 9. The contentions of both the learned counsels have been considered and material on record including the records of - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 the Tribunal have been perused. The questions that arise for consideration are: i) Whether compensation is required to be awarded in MVC No.13/2015 instituted by the claimants? ii) Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper? Regarding Question No.(i): 10. It is the matter of record that the claimants have instituted MVC No.13/2015 as well as ECA No.40/2015. During the pendency of above appeal, the claimant No.1, who is the wife of deceased, also died and she is survived by their children i.e., appellants No.2 and 3/claimants No.2 and 3. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in MVC No.13/2015, the insurer has preferred the above appeal and being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in ECA No.40/2015, the insurer has preferred MFA No.102960/2016. In ECA No.40/2015 a compensation of ₹8,26,098/- together with interest at 12% per annum was awarded, which was deposited by the insurer before the Trial Court in the said proceedings on 12.02.2025. However, the claimants have filed an affidavit in the cross-objection that they would not claim the - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 compensation awarded in ECA No.40/2016 and they would pursue the claim proceedings instituted in MVC No.13/2015, which was before the Tribunal. In view of the affidavit filed by the claimants, the appeal in MFA No.102960/2016, has been allowed by this Court vide order dated 26.03.2025 and the compensation deposited by the insurer in ECA No.40/2015 has been ordered to be refunded to the insurer. 11. In view of the same, there is no impediment to adjudicate upon the claim made by the claimants in MVC No.13/2015. Hence, the question No.(i) framed for considered is answered in the affirmative. Regarding Question No.(ii): 12. It is averred in the claim petition that the deceased was working as a Supervisor in Commercial Department, Neha Contractions Pvt Ltd., and was earning a monthly income of ₹25,000/-. PW.2 has deposed that he is working as a Chief Project Manager at Neha Construction Pvt Ltd., and that the deceased was working as a Supervisor in Commercial Department, Neha Contractions Pvt Ltd., and was drawing a monthly salary of ₹20,099/-. The salary certificate issued by - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 PW.2 has been marked as Ex.P6, whereas the employer of the deceased has placed on record that the deceased was paid a total monthly salary of ₹20,099/-. PW.2 has stated in the cross-examination that the salary of the deceased was being paid in cash by the head office and that the payment of salary was being done to the employee by taking his signature in a register. It is further deposed that the registers have been sent to the head office. It is further stated that the employer has paid death compensation to the legal representatives of deceased. However, PW.2 is unable to state the amount paid. 13. It is forthcoming that PW.2 was also examined as RW.1 in ECA No.40/2015, wherein, he has deposed that the deceased was working as a Supervisor in Commercial Department, Neha Contractions Pvt Ltd., and was getting paid wages of ₹340/- per day. The master roll thumb registers of wages was marked as Ex.P10 in ECA No.40/2015. 14. It is clear from the aforementioned that there is contradictory testimony of PW.2 with regard to the income of deceased adduced in MVC No.13/2015 and ECA No.40/2015. It is also pertinent to note that the same person has been - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 examined in both the said proceedings, who was given contradictory evidence. 15. Although it is the vehement contention of learned counsel for the insurer that the case is an outcome of fraud and deliberately false evidence has been adduced, it is pertinent to note that the accident as well as the death of deceased in the said accident is undisputed. The contradictory testimony is only with regard to the income of the deceased that too by representative of employer of deceased. In the absence of acceptable material with regard to the income of the deceased, the notional income as per the chart followed for settlement of cases in Lok Adalat conducted by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is to be followed and accordingly having regard to the date of accident, the income of the deceased is re-assessed as ₹7,500/- per month. 16. The deceased was aged 39 years as on the date of accident. The accident occurred on 20.09.2014. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi And - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 Others4, 40% of the income is to be added towards loss of future prospects. Considering the age of the deceased, the appropriate applicable multiplier is 15. Therefore, loss of dependency is re-assessed as ₹12,60,000/- (₹7,500/- + 40% x 12 x 15 x 1/3). 17. The wife of the deceased also died during the pendency of the appeal. Hence, the claimants, being the children, are entitled to compensation under the head of loss of consortium of Rs.40,000/- each together with increment of 10%, in terms of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Limited Vs. Nanu Ram & Others5, and accordingly loss of consortium is re-assessed as Rs.88,000/- (Rs.40,000/- + 10% x 2), as against ₹20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal (which included loss of love and affection). 18. Further, a compensation of ₹15,000/- each is awarded under the head ‘loss of estate’ and ‘funeral expenses’ respectively, along with 10% escalation. Hence, a sum of 4 (2017) 16 SCC 680 5 2018 ACJ 2782 - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 ₹16,500/- each is awarded under the heads of ‘loss of estate’ and ‘funeral expenses’ respectively. 19. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for compensation under various heads as under: Sl. No. Heads Amount awarded by the Tribunal (₹) Amount awarded by this Court (₹) 1. Towards loss of dependency. 22,83,840.00 12,60,000.00 2. Towards loss of estate. 10,000.00 16,500.00 3. Towards loss of love and affection. 10,000.00 ------- 4. Towards transportation of dead body for performing funeral and obsequies ceremony. 20,000.00 16,500.00 4. Towards loss of consortium to the first petitioner. 20,000.00 ------- 5. Towards loss of consortium. 88,000.00 Total 23,43,840.00 13,81,000.00 20. Hence, the claimants are entitled for total compensation of ₹13,81,000/- as against ₹23,43,840/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded interest at 7% per anuum, which is just and proper. Accordingly, the - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced and question No.(ii) is answered in the negative. 21. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i) MFA No.102799/2016 is allowed; ii) MFA CROB No.100034/2019 is rejected; iii) The judgment and award dated 30.03.2016, passed in MVC No.13/2015, by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-XII, Ballari, is modified as ordered herein. In all other respects the award of the Tribunal shall remain unaltered; iv) The claimants are entitled to a total compensation of ₹13,81,000/- along with interest at 7% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization as against ₹23,43,840/- awarded by the Tribunal; v) The owner and insurer, who are arrayed as respondents No.2 and 3 before the Tribunal, are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation awarded; - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 vi) The amount deposited by the appellant/insurer in MFA No.102799/2016 together with the records be transmitted to the Tribunal. The insurer/respondent No.3 before the Tribunal shall deposit the balance compensation together with accrued interest within a period of four weeks; vii) Consequent to the deposit, the compensation be disbursed to the claimants No.2 and 3 (the children of the deceased) equally; viii) 50% of the compensation payable to claimant No.2 shall be disbursed and the balance 50% shall be kept in a fixed deposit in any nationalized bank for a period of 3 years, upon expiry of which, the same shall be released in favour of claimant No.2; ix) The compensation payable to claimant No.3 shall be kept in a fixed deposit until she attains majority. After attaining majority, 50% of the compensation amount together with accrued - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5635-DB MFA No. 102799 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100034 of 2019 interest shall be released in favour of claimant No.3 and the balance 50% shall be kept in a fixed deposit for a further period of 3 years, upon expiry of which, the same shall be released in favour of claimant No.3; xi) The Registry to draw the modified decree accordingly; No costs. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE PMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13