- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13503 MFA No. 102795 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102795 OF 2014 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. THE AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., 4TH FLOOR, ALANKAR PLAZA, PARK ROAD, KURNOOL, ANDHRA PRADESH REP BY THE AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY, THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE, CTS #172/171, V.A. KALBURGI SQUARE, DESAI CROSS, DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBLI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S K KAYAKAMATH, ADV) AND: 1. P. BHEEMALINGAPPA S/O P.LINGAPPA AGED 66 YEARS, 2. SMT. NAGALAKSHMI W/O BHEMMALINGAPPA AGED 54 YEARS, 3. SMT. P.BHAGYA W/O RAMAKRISHNA AGED 27 YEARS, 4. KUM VANI D/O RAMAKRISHNA AGED 8 YEARS, 5. KISHORE S/O RAMAKRISHNA AGED 6 YEARS, R4 & R5 ARE MINORS, REP BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER SMT. BHAGYA W/O RAMAKRISHNA RESPO. NO.3 MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.27 11:23:32 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13503 MFA No. 102795 of 2014 ALL ARE R/O: T.BUDIHAL VILLAGE, BELLARY DISTRICT. 6. VICTOR S/O BHUSHANA AGE : 29 YEARS, DRIVER OF LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO. AP-04/X-6838 VELUGODU POST, INDIRA NAGAR, KURNOOL DIST, ANDHRA PRADESH. 7. TALLAPU REDDY S/O SIVA PRASAD REDDY MAJOR, OWNER OF LORRY BEARING REGISTRATION NO. AP-04/X-6838, R/O. H.NO.3-895, YMR COLONY, PRODDUTOR, CUDDAPAH DIST., ANDHRA PRADESH. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.C. JNANAYYASWAMI, ADV FOR R1 TO R3, R4 & R5 ARE MINORS, R/BY R3, NOTICE TO R6 & R7 ARE SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:01.07.2014, PASSED IN MVC.NO.978/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.IX AT BELLARY, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.25,51,000/- WITH THE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13503 MFA No. 102795 of 2014 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award dated 01.07.2014 passed in MVC No.978/2010 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-IX, Ballari (‘Tribunal’ for short). 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: 2.1. On 30.09.2009 at 07:30 a.m., while Ramakrishna - the son of petitioners No.1 and 2, husband of petitioner No.3 and the father of minor petitioners No.4 and 5, was riding his motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-34/J-7479 along with milk cans on the left side of Anantapur-Ballari road, at that time, the driver of the lorry bearing Reg.No.AP-04/X-6838 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motorcycle. As a result, said Ramakrishna fell down and sustained grievous injuries. It is contended that the petitioner has spent Rs.10,00,000/- towards the medical and other incidental expenses. Hence, the petitioner filed a claim petition - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13503 MFA No. 102795 of 2014 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking for compensation on account of injuries sustained in a road traffic accident. 3. During the pendency of the claim petition, Ramakrishna died and his legal representatives were brought on record. 4. Notice was issued to the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle. Despite service of notice, they remained unrepresented and were placed ex-parte. 5. The Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident and prays to dismiss the claim petition against the Insurance Company. 6. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13503 MFA No. 102795 of 2014 7. To substantiate the case of the petitioners, petitioner No.1 examined as PW-1, examined the Doctor as PW-2, examined the Medical Records Technician as PW-3 and marked 24 documents as Exs.P1 to P24. On the other hand, the Insurance Company has not led any oral evidence, but marked one document as Ex.R1 with consent. 8. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part and awarded a compensation of Rs.25,51,000/- with costs and interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization and directed the Insurance Company to pay the compensation amount. The claim petition, against the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle, was dismissed. 9. The Insurance Company, aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, filed this appeal challenging the quantum of compensation. 10. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company and learned counsel for the petitioners. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13503 MFA No. 102795 of 2014 11. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that, the deceased petitioner has filed a claim petition in the year 2010 and he passed away on 03.04.2012 i.e., during the pendency of the claim petition. He submits that, the legal representatives were brought on record. The LRs are not entitled for compensation under the head loss of dependency. They are entitled only for compensation under the head of incidental expenses. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on a higher side. He also submitted that, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as Rs.10,500/-. In the absence income proof, the Tribunal ought to have taken the notional income as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (‘KSLSA’ for short). The accident occurred in 2009. The notional income would be Rs.5,000/-. The notional income assessed by the Tribunal is on a higher side. Hence, on these grounds he prays to allow the appeal and reduce the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13503 MFA No. 102795 of 2014 12. Learned counsel for the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner supported the impugned judgment and the award and prays to dismiss the appeal, 13. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The point that would arise for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation. 14. There is no dispute about the occurrence of the accident and the deceased petitioner having suffered injuries. The deceased petitioner filed a claim petition in 2010, he passed away on 03.04.2012 and the LRs were brought on record. Despite the death, the LRs of the deceased can pursue the claim, since the ‘property’ under the Motor Vehicles Act has a much wider connotation than its conventional definition and includes the estate left behind by the deceased. The legal heirs can pursue the claim in the case of death of the injured in a road traffic accident. There is no reason to prohibit the legal representatives to pursue the claim petition filed by the deceased during his lifetime for the loss of property, akin to - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13503 MFA No. 102795 of 2014 the estate of the injured, if injured dies subsequently. I see absolutely no reason to differ from the declaration of law and the insurer also raises no objection on the same. 15. Taking into consideration the death of the petitioner, the petitioners are not entitled for the compensation under the head of loss of dependency. The LRs of the deceased petitioner have not produced any proof to show that there was a nexus between the injuries and the death of the deceased petitioner. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the deceased petitioner, also the evidence of the Doctor and further the deceased petitioner has spent Rs.8,99,500/- towards the medical expenses, the LRs of the deceased petitioner are entitled to a global compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. 16. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed-in-part; - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13503 MFA No. 102795 of 2014 ii. The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is hereby modified; iii. The LRs of the deceased petitioner are entitled to a global compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of petition till its realisation; iv. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; v. Registry is directed to transfer the amount in deposit and Trial Court records to the Tribunal, forthwith; vi. Registry is directed to refund the excess amount in deposit, if any, to the Insurance Company; vii. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE PA CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13