- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100634 OF 2020 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100833 OF 2020 (MV-D), MFA CROSS OBJ NO. 100055 OF 2020 (MV-D) IN MFA NO. 100634/2020: BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MAHADEVAYYA MATAPATI S/O SIDDAYYA AGE: 64 YEARS, 2. SMT. JAYASHREE W/O MAHADEVAYYA MATAPATI AGE: 54 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/O: NO.168 B, KALPARUKSHA, AVANI SRINGERI NAGAR, 1ST CROSS, BEHIND EVERFINE, SUPER MARKET, BEGURU POST, BENGALURU-560068. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. SHUBERA SINGH S/O GOPAL SINGH, AGE: 54 YEARS, DRIVER, R/O: KATRALA, CHITRADURGA-577501. 2. MR. BYRAHANUMAIAH S/O LATE BYRE GOWDA AGE: MAJOR, OWNER OF TATA SUMO BEARING REG.NO. KA-01 B-7748, R/O: THOPPAGANAHALLI, RAYSANDRA HOBLI, KANAKAPURA, BENGALURU-562117. 3. REGIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD., CBI MAIN ROAD, GANGANAGAR, R.T. NAGAR POST, BENGALURU-560032. (INSURER OF VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA-01-B-7748) Digitally signed by VINAYAKA B V Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 4. SMT. CHAITRA R.G. W/O LATE SWAROOP MAHADEVAYYA, D/O RACHAYYA GUTTARGIMATH, AGE: 32 YEARS, R/O: SHASTRI NAGAR, 1ST CROSS, WARD NO.35, TGB COLONY, BALLARI-583101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. PRAVEEN TARIKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R4; NOTICE TO R1 & R2-SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.10.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.203/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE III MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION & ETC. IN MFA NO. 100833/2020: BETWEEN: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., CBI MAIN ROAD, GANGANAGAR, R.T. NAGAR POST, BANGALORE-562117. R/BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER. ...APPELLANT (BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. CHAITRA R.G., W/O LATE SWAROOP MAHADEVAYYA, D/O RACHAYYA GUTTARGIMATH, AGE. 32 YEARS, SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O SHASTRI NAGAR, I CROSS, WARD NO. 35, TGB COLONY, BALLARI-580024. 2. SHUBERA SINGH S/O GOPAL SINGH, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: KATRALA, CHITRADURGA-577501. 3. BYRAHANUMAIAH S/O LATE BYRE GOWDA, MAJOR, OWNER OF TATA SUMO BEARING NO.KA-01/B-7748, R/O: THOPPGANAHALLI, RYSANDRA HOBLI, KANAKAPURA, RAMANAGARA - 562117. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 4. MAHADEVAYYA MATPATI S/O SIDDAYYA, AGE: MAJOR, R/O: D.NO.168 B, KALPARUKSHA, VANI SRINGERI NAGAR, I CROSS, BEHIND EVERFINE, SUPER MARKET, BEGURU POST, BENGALURU-560068. 5. SMT. JAYASHREE W/O MAHADEVAPPA MATPATI, AGE: MAJOR, R/O: D.NO.168B, KALPARUKSHA, VANI SRINGERI NAGAR, I CROSS, BEHIND EVERFINE, SUPER MARKET, BEGURU POST, BENGALURU-560068. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRAVEEN TARIKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5; NOTICE TO R2 & R3-DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.10.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.203/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE III MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BALLARI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,12,01,360/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION & ETC. IN MFA.CROB NO. 100055/2020: BETWEEN: SMT. CHITHRA R.G., W/O LATE SWAROOP MAHADEVAYYA D/O RACHAYYA GUTTARGIMATH AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: SOFTWARE ENGINEER, R/O: SHASTRI NAGAR, 1ST CROSS, WARD NO.35, TGB COLONY, BALLARI. ...CROSS OBJECTOR (BY SRI. PRAVEEN TARIKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHUBERA G SINGH S/O GOPAL SINGH AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O: KATRALA, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577501. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 2. SHRI BYRAHANUMAIAH B GOWDA S/O LATE BYRE GOWDA AGE: MAJOR, OWNER OF TATA SUMO R/O: THOPAGANAHALLI RAYSANDRA HOBLI, KANAKAPURA, RAMANAGARA-562117. 3. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., CBI MAIN ROAD, GANGANGAR, R.T. NAGAR POST, BENGALURU-32. 4. MAHADEVAYYA S MATPATI S/O SIDDAYYA AGE: MAJOR, R/O: D.NO.168 B, KALPARUKSHA, AVANI SRINGERI NAGAR, 1ST CROSS, BEHIND EVERFINE SUPER MARKET, BEGURU POST, BENGALURU-68. 5. SMT. JAYASHREE M MATAPTI W/O MAHADEVAYYA S MATPATI AGE. MAJOR, R/O: D.NO. 168 B, KALPARUKSHA, AVANI SRINGERI NAGAR, 1ST CROSS, BEHIND EVERFINE SUPER MARKET, BEGURU POST, BENGALURU-68. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SRI. V.S. KALASURMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5) THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.100833/2020 FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.10.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO. 203/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE III MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION & ETC. THESE APPEALS AND THE CROSS OBJECTION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) MFA No.100634/2020 is filed by the parents of the deceased, MFA Crob No.100055/2020 is filed by the wife of the deceased and MFA No.100833/2020 is filed by the insurance company challenging the quantum of compensation awarded under judgment and award dated 4.10.2019 passed in MVC No.203/2017 on the file of learned MACT-III, Ballari1. 2. Brief facts giving rise to filing of these appeals are that wife of the deceased Swaroop Mahadevayya filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation on the ground that her husband Swaroop met with road accident on 3.3.2017 due to rash and negligent driving of the Tata Sumo Vehicle Bearing registration No.KA-01-AB-7748 by its driver. It is averred that the deceased was aged 31 years at the time of the accident, was a Software Engineer working in Bristlecone 1 For short, ‘Tribunal’ - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 India Limited and drawing a salary of Rs.18,33,348/- per annum. 3. The respondents appeared and filed a detailed written statement denying the entire averments made in the claim petition, including the age, avocation and income of the deceased and sought for dismissal of the claim petition. 4. The Tribunal recorded the evidence of the parties. On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,12,01,360/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, directing the insurance company to make good the compensation. Aggrieved by the same, the parents, wife and the insurance company are before this Court challenging the quantum of compensation. 5. Learned counsel Sri.V.S. Kalasurmath appearing for the appellants-parents of the deceased and Sri. Praveen Tarikar, learned counsel appearing for the cross- objector/wife of the deceased would support the impugned - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 judgment and award of the Tribunal insofar as finding with regard to the negligence and liability is concerned. It is submitted that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate Ex.P9- Salary Slip of the deceased in its proper perspective and wrongly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.72,627/- per month, which they seek to re-assess based on Ex.P9. It is further submitted that to corroborate Ex.P9, bank statement of the deceased along with memo dated 22.09.2025 has been produced to establish that the deceased was earning more than Rs.12,00,000/- per annum. It is further submitted that the award of compensation under the conventional heads is not inconsonance with the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others2 and Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram & Others3. Sri. V.S. Kalasurmath submits that the Tribunal has erred in apportioning the compensation at the rate of 80% to the wife and 20% to the parents, which he 2 2017 (16) SCC 680 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 seeks to modify the same by considering the fact that the claimant-wife is a single lady and she can move on in her life and the parents are age old persons suffering from different ailments. Hence, they seek to modify the apportionment appropriately by allowing the appeals filed by the parents and wife of the deceased. 6. Per contra, Smt. Preeti Shashank, learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company vehemently opposes the appeal and cross-objection filed by the parents and the wife and submits that the Tribunal has failed to take note of the income tax return filed by the deceased, which is part of the record and as per income tax return, the deceased was having income from salary at Rs.6,05,095/- per annum. Hence, he seeks to re-assess the income based on income tax returns marked along with Ex.P9-Pay Slip. It is submitted that the income tax returns filed by the deceased clearly indicates the actual income and Ex.P9-Pay Slip of the deceased is not corroborated with any evidence. It is further submitted that nothing has prevented the claimants from examining the employer of the deceased, who would have - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 spoken with regard to Ex.P9. In the absence of such evidence, he seeks to consider the income tax returns and re-assess the income of the deceased by allowing the appeal filed by the insurance company. He further submits that rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal on the compensation amount at 9% per annum is on the higher side and it has to be reduced to 6% per annum. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeals filed by the claimants. 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and meticulously perused the material available on record, including original records. We have given our anxious consideration to the rival submissions advanced. 8. The point that would arise for our consideration in the present appeals is: Whether the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal calls for interference at the hands of this Court? 9. Answer to the above point would be in the “affirmative” for the following reasons: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 10. The parties to the proceedings do not dispute the accident and the liability of the Insurance Company. The Tribunal considering oral and documentary evidence assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.72,627/- per month and awarded compensation. We have perused the income tax returns for the Assessment Year 2016-17 marked along with Ex.P9-Salary Slip. It is to be noticed that the accident took place on 3.3.2017. Considering the same, we are of the considered view that the income tax returns cannot be considered for the simple reason that the said income tax returns is for the Assessment Year 2016-17, wherein the deceased has declared his income at Rs.6,05,095/- and the said income was for the Financial Year 2015-16. However, the accident had occurred on 3.3.2017. Considering the said aspect, we propose to consider Ex.P9 as the basis for reassessment of income of the deceased. We have also perused the bank statement produced by the claimants along with a memo, which indicates that the deceased was working in Bristlecone India Limited and drawing monthly salary as per Ex.P9. The said bank - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 statement is corroborated with Ex.P9-salary slip. Therefore, considering the same, we propose to re-assess the income of the deceased on the basis of Ex.P9. As per Ex.P9, the annual income of the deceased would be Rs.10,46,940/- after deducting professional tax and in the aforesaid amount, income tax is required to be deducted, which is calculated for the Financial Year 2016-17 as under: For the F.Y.2016-17, income tax slab is, upto Rs.2,50,000/-, income tax is Nil; Rs.2,50,000 to Rs.5,00,000/-, income tax is 10% and Rs.5,00,000/- to Rs.10,00,000/-, income tax is 20% and above Rs.10,00,000/-, income tax is 30%. Applying the same, the income tax for the total income of Rs.10,46,940/- works out as under: Upto Rs.2,50,000/- Nil Rs.2,50,000/- to Rs.5,00,000/- Rs.25,000 Rs.5,00,000/- to Rs.10,00,000/- Rs.1,00,000 Above Rs.10,00,000/- i.e. Rs.46,940/- Rs. 14,082 ---------------- Total Income Tax Rs.1,39,082/- ---------------- 11. Accordingly, out of Rs.10,46,940/-, a sum of Rs.1,39,082/- towards income tax has to be deducted. After deducting the same, net income would be Rs.9,07,858/- - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 (Rs.10,46,940 – 1,39,082). There is no dispute with regard to age of the deceased as 31 years, multiplier of 16 and also deduction of 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. In terms of decision of the Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi supra, the claimants would be entitled to addition of 50% of the assessed income towards loss of future prospects, as the deceased was a Software Engineer working in a company having permanent job. Thus, loss of dependency is recalculated as under: Rs.9,07,858 + 50/100 x 16 x 2/3 = Rs.1,45,25,728/- 12. Admittedly, there are three claimants and hence, each of the claimants are entitled to Rs.44,000/- towards loss of consortium including 10% escalation. Under the conventional heads, the claimants are entitled to Rs.16,500/- towards loss of estate and Rs.16,500/- towards funeral expenses including 10% escalation. 13. The Tribunal, in our considered view, has erred in apportioning the compensation at the ratio of 80% to the wife and 10% each to the parents. Considering the - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 submission and taking note of the fact that the claimant-wife is a widow and no children from the said wedlock and the parents are suffering from age old ailments, we deem it appropriate to apportion the compensation at the rate of 60% to the wife and 20% each to the parents, which would meet the ends of justice. 14. The Tribunal has committed an error in awarding rate of interest at 9% per annum, which appears to be on the higher side. Normally, this Court and the Apex Court taking note of prevailing rate of interest paid on the term deposit by the nationalized banks, would award interest at 6% per annum. Therefore, in the present case also, the claimants are entitled to interest on the compensation amount at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. The claimants are entitled for the following modified compensation: 1 Loss of dependency Rs.1,45,25,728/- 2 Loss of consortium (Rs.44,000/- each Rs.1,32,000/- 3 Transportation of dead body and Funeral expenses Rs.16,500/- 4 Loss of estate Rs.16,500/- Total Rs.1,46,90,728/- - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 15. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.1,46,90,728/- as against Rs.1,12,01,360/- awarded by the Tribunal. 16. Hence, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The above appeals and the cross-objection are allowed in part. ii. The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified holding that the claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.1,46,90,728/- as against Rs.1,12,01,360/- awarded by the Tribunal. iii. The entire compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of payment. iv. The insurance company shall deposit the aforesaid compensation amount along with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. v. The entire compensation amount along with interest shall be apportioned at the ratio of 60% to the wife and 20% each to the - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13221-DB MFA No. 100634 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 100833 of 2020 MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 parents. Disbursement and deposit shall be made in terms of the award of the Tribunal. vi. The amount in deposit be transmitted to the Tribunal along with TCR forthwith. vii. Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE JTR CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 10