- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101075 OF 2022 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. DAYANAND BALAPPA THILARE AGE. 56 YEARS, OCC. RETIRED, R/O. YELIMUNOLLI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. 2. SMT. SHOBHA W/O DAYANAND THILARE AGE. 50 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O. YELIMUNOLLI, TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. …APPELLANTS (BY SRIYUTHS. SHIVRAJ S BALLOLI AND SOURABH R. MIRJE, ADVS) AND: 1. SHRI. ILAYI MALIKSAB MUTNALI AGE. MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS R/O. H.NO. 760, MUNOLI LANE, INGALI TQ. HUKKERI, DIST. BELAGAVI. (OWNER OF TEMPO TRAX NO. KA-23/M-9132). 2. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, D.O. E-8, EPIP SITAPURA INDUSTRIAL AREA, JAIPUR-RAJASTHAN-302022 R/BY ITS MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADV FOR R2 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 8.12.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.949/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, HUKKERI, PARTLY ALLOWING MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.08.22 12:51:26 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) 1. This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 08.12.2021 passed in MVC No.949 of 2020 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hukkeri (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: 3. It is the case of the claimants that on 27.08.2019, their son—Mahantesh met with an accident, sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same. The accident occurred due to the rash and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 negligent driving by the driver of the Tempo Trax bearing Reg.No.KA-23/M-9132. The deceased was working in M/s.AKP Industries, Machhe, Belagavi and was getting ₹15,000/- monthly salary and was maintaining his family. The claimants being the legal representatives of the deceased Mahantesh filed a claim petition seeking compensation on account of his death and pray to allow the claim petition. 4. Notice was issued to the respondents. Despite the service of notice, respondents remained unrepresented and were placed ex-parte. 5. The claimants to substantiate the claim petition averments, examined claimant No.1 as PW-1 and marked 10 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-10. 6. On assessment of verbal and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal allowed the claim petition in part with cost, and the compensation amount of ₹20,78,400/- was awarded with an interest at 6% - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 per annum and held that the owner of the offending vehicle is liable to pay the compensation amount with interest and directed respondent No.1—owner to deposit the compensation amount with interest within 3 months. 7. The claimants dissatisfied with the adequacy of the compensation, filed this appeal. 8. Heard learned counsel for the claimants and learned counsel for the insurance company. 9. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. It is alleged that though the driver of the offending vehicle was not possessing a valid and effective driving licence, admittedly, as on the date of the accident, the vehicle was insured with respondent No.2. He submits that, the Tribunal should have directed respondent No.2—Insurance Company to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 pay the compensation and then recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. 10. He places reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sunita & Ors. v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (2025 INSC 867) (Civil Appeal No. 9538 of 2025 | Decided on July 17, 2025). Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal. 11. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 supported the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and prays to dismiss the appeal. 12. Perused the records and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. 13. The point that arises for consideration in this appeal is regarding the quantum of the compensation. 14. There is no dispute that the deceased Mahantesh met with an accident, and sustained grievous injuries and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 later, succumbed to the same. The claimants have produced the copy of the charge-sheet, marked as Exhibit P-7, which discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle. 15. The police have filed a charge sheet for offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Section 3 read with Section 181, Section 5 read with Section 180 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. 16. From the perusal of the charge sheet, it is clear that the driver of the offending vehicle was not possessing a valid and effective driving licence as of the date of the incident. The owner has permitted the driver to drive the vehicle without ensuring that the driver had a valid and effective driving license, as on the date of the accident. Thus, there is a violation of the policy condition. Hence, the Tribunal was justified in - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 dismissing the claim petition against the insurance company of the offending vehicle. 17. However, on the date of the accident, the vehicle was insured with respondent No.2 and the policy was in force. Hence, respondent No.2 is liable to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and then recover the same from the owner of the said vehicle. 18. The Tribunal ought to have directed respondent No.2, Insurance Company, to deposit the compensation amount and then recover the same. On the contrary, the Tribunal directed the owner of the vehicle to deposit the compensation amount. 19. Considering the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sunita (referred to supra), respondent No.2 in the instant case, is directed to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and then recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 20. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the deceased—Mahantesh was aged about 25 years as of the date of the accident. It is contended that he was working in M/s.AKP Industries at Machhe, Belagavi and getting a monthly salary of ₹15,000/-. 21. To substantiate the said contention, the claimants have not produced any proof of income. In the absence of proof of income, the Tribunal has taken the notional income of the deceased at ₹13,250/- as the accident occurred in 2019. 22. The Tribunal was justified in assessing the notional income at ₹13,250/-, and also added future prospects at 40%, as per the proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157. The Tribunal, after deducting 50% of the said income and applying the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 appropriate multiplier of ‘18’, ultimately awarded compensation of ₹20,03,400/- [₹9,275/- X 12 X ‘18’] under the head loss of dependency, which in my considered view, is just and proper and does not need interference at the hands of this Court. 23. Further, the Tribunal has awarded compensation of a sum of ₹15,000/- towards loss of estate; ₹40,000/- towards loss of love and affection; ₹5,000/- towards conveyance expenses and ₹15,000/- towards funeral expenses. 24. In view of the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Magma General Insurance Company Ltd. v. Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram and others, reported in AIR online 2018 SC 1249, each of the claimants are entitled to a sum of ₹96,000/- (₹48,000/- x 2) towards loss of love and affection. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 25. In addition to it, the claimants are entitled to compensation of ₹18,000/- towards funeral expenses and ₹18,000/- towards loss of estate. 26. Thus, the claimants are entitled to total compensation of ₹21,35,400/- as against ₹20,03,400/- awarded by the Tribunal. Thus, the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of ₹1,32,000/-. 27. In view of the above discretion, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (i) This Miscellaneous First Appeal is allowed. (ii) The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No. 949/2020, is modified. (iii) The claimants are entitled for to an enhanced compensation of ₹1,32,000/- with interest at 6% per - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9812 MFA No. 101075 of 2022 annum from the date of petition till realisation. (iv) The insurance company is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount with interest within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and then recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle, in accordance with law. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE RK CT: BSB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 17