- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA M.F.A NO. 101259 OF 2015 (MV) C/W. M.F.A. NO. 101293 OF 2015 (MV-D) IN MFA 101259 OF 2015 BETWEEN: SMT. JAYASHREE W/O. DEMAPPA BENAKATTI, AGE 50 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WIFE, R/O. BELAVI BUILDING, RHISLDAR GALLI, BELGAUM. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SURAJ S. MUTNAL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI. ADRUSHYANAND S/O. DEMAPPA BENAKATTI, AGE 26 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. BELAVI BUILDING, RHISLDAR GALLI, BELGAUM. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSU. CO. LTD., THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR, MADIWALE ARCADE, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI. 3. SHRI. AMIT S/O. DEMAPPA BENAKATTI, AGE 24 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. BELAVI BUILDING, RHISLDAR GALLI, BELGAUM. (DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S. Y. YAJI, ADV. FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 & R3 ARE SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 13.01.2015, PASSED IN MVC.NO.1725/2011, ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE & MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-II, BELGAUM, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 PETITION FOR COMPENSATION & SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA 101293 OF 2015 BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR, MADIVAL ARCADE, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI. REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, SUMANGALA COMPLEX, LEMINGTON ROAD, HUBBALLI-580020. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. S. V. YAJI, ADVOCATE) AND 1. JAYASHREE W/O. DEMAPPA BENAKATTI, AGE 54 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O. 3553/B. BELAVI BUILDING, RHISLDAR GALLI, TQ: DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. ADRUSHYANAND S/O. DEMAPPA BENAKATTI, AGE 30 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. 3553/B. BELAVI BUILDING, RHISLDAR GALLI, TQ: DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. AMIT S/O. DEMAPPA BENAKATTI, AGE 28 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. 3553/B. BELAVI BUILDING, RHISLDAR GALLI, TQ:DIST: BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRU. SURAJ MUTNAL, ADV. FOR R1 TO R3) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.01.2015, PASSED IN MVC NO.1725/2011, ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-II, BELGAUM, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.13.90,000/- ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA) 1. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for both parties. 2. The appeal in MFA No.101259/2015 has been filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation, while the appeal in MFA No.101293/2015 has been filed by the insurer challenging the quantum of compensation awarded in judgment and award dated 13th January 2015, passed in MVC No.1725/2011, by the I- Addl. District Judge and MACT-II, Belgaum (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”). 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to according to their ranking before the Tribunal. 4. Brief facts of the case are as follows: that the claimant is the wife of the deceased and respondent Nos.1 and 3 are sons of Demappa. On 02.05.2011, Demappa - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 Basavaneppa Benakatti met with a fatal accident, while traveling with his son in a TATA Indigo Car bearing registration No.KA-48/M-1139 (for short “offending vehicle”), due to the rash and negligent driving of the said offending vehicle by its driver, who is his son (respondent No.1). As a result of the accident, he sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to the same. It was the further contended by the claimant that the deceased was aged about 57 years at the time of accident and was engaged in hotel and lodging business, earning more than Rs.22,000/- p.m. In addition, he owned agricultural land, from which he was earning approximately Rs.5,000/- p.m. The deceased was maintaining his family from the said income. With these reasons, the claimant has sought compensation of Rs.35,00,000/-. 5. Respondent No.2, in its statement of objections, denied the averments made in the claim petition. It was further contended that the deceased was aged more than 65 years at the time accident. It was also asserted that - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 the driver of the offending vehicle was not possess a valid and effective driving licence. The liability of respondent No.2 is restricted to the terms and conditions of the policy of insurance. On these grounds, respondent No.2 prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. 6. The Tribunal framed necessary issues and recorded the evidence. 7. In order to prove the case, the claimant examined two witnesses as PW1 and PW2, and produced 16 documents, which were marked as Exs.P1 to P16. The respondents produced one document, marked as Ex.R1. 8. After hearing both parties, the Tribunal awarded compensation as follows: 1. Loss of consortium Rs.1,00,000/- 2. Funeral expenses Rs.25,000/- 3. Loss of estate Rs.5,000/- 4. Loss of dependency Rs.12,60,000/- TOTAL Rs.13,90,000/- 9. Learned counsel for the claimant contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 various heads is on the lower side. It was submitted that the deceased was earning Rs.2,00,000/- p.a. from hotel and lodging business, and more than Rs.60,000/- p.a. from agricultural land. The claimant had also produced the income tax returns of the deceased. However, the notional income assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side, and the compensation awarded under all the heads is inadequate. Hence, it was prayed that the compensation be enhanced accordingly. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the insurer vehemently contended that the income assessed by the Tribunal is on the higher side. It was argued that the claimant did not produce previous income tax returns to substantiate the income of the deceased. In the cross- examination, PW1 admitted that the hotel and lodging business was continued by the sons of the deceased after his demise, and that the agricultural lands were also being cultivated by the claimants. Therefore, it was submitted that there is no actual loss of income due to the death of - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 the deceased. It was further contended that the Tribunal has erred in not deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased. In support of his contention, learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench in MFA No.101283/2020 C/w. MFA Crob. No.100023/2021, disposed off on 22nd September 2021 in the case of the Manager, the new India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Kum. Kanchana and another, wherein it was held that in cases involving a sole dependent, 50% of the income should be deducted towards personal expenses. Accordingly, it was submitted that the same principle ought to be applied to the facts and circumstances of the present case. On these grounds, learned counsel prayed for the award of just and reasonable compensation. 11. Upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for both parties, the point that arises for consideration is as follows: “Whether the Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation?” - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 12. The claimant has produced the Income Tax Return annexed as Ex.P6. In the calculation sheet, the date of birth of the deceased is mentioned as 02.05.1950. Further the deceased was holding PAN Card. Therefore, the date of birth mentioned in the said statement annexed to the ITR appears to be acceptable. Based on this, the age of deceased was 61 years as on the date of accident. 13. Ex.P5, which was filed prior to the death of the deceased. Accordingly, the income of deceased was mentioned as Rs.1,93,380/- after deducting Rs.3,608/- towards income tax. As there was no anticipation of death at time of filing Ex.P5, the income mentioned therein is accepted as taken as the annual income of the deceased, derived from both agriculture and from business activities. 14. In the present case, the deceased is survived by his wife and two sons. The wife is the claimant, while the two sons are respondent Nos.1 and 3, who are the owner and driver of the vehicle involved in the accident. As per the judgment in the case of National Insurance - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 Co.Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others1, 1/3rd of the income is to be deducted towards personal expenses in cases where the deceased is survived by more than one dependent. 15. Learned counsel for the insurer has relied upon a judgment of the Division Bench of this Court, wherein it was held that if the claimant is the sole dependent, a deduction of 50% is applicable. However, in the present case, the dependents include the petitioner as well as respondent Nos.1 and 3. Under these circumstances, the appropriate deduction would be 1/3rd as laid down by the Apex Court in Pranay Sethi & Others (supra). 16. Undisputedly, the appropriate multiplier applicable to the facts of the present case is 7. Accordingly, compensation towards loss of dependency is assessed on that basis. 1 AIR 2017 SC 5157 - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 17. Consequently, the claimant is entitled for the following amount of compensations: 1. Loss of consortium (Rs.40,000/- x 3) Rs.1,20,000/- 2. Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/- 3. Loss of estate Rs.15,000/- 4. Loss of dependency (Rs.1,89,772/- x 7 x 2/3) Rs.8,85,602/- TOTAL Rs.10,35,602/- Rounded off to Rs.10,36,000/- 18. The claimants are also entitled to interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the compensation amount from the date of petition till its realization. 19. In light of the above, this Court passes the following: ORDER (i) The appeals are allowed in part. (ii) The judgment and award dated 13th January 2015, passed in MVC No.1725/2011, by the I-Addl. District Judge and MACT-II, Belgaum is modified. (iii) The petitioner and respondent Nos.1 and 3 are entitled to the total compensation of - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:6255 MFA No. 101259 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 101293 of 2015 Rs.10,36,000/- instead of Rs.13,90,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. (iv) The respondent – insurer shall deposit the compensation amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment before the Tribunal. (v) The amount in deposit, if any, be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement. Excess amount in deposit, if any, be refunded to the insurer on due acknowledgement. (vi) The remaining portion of the order of the Tribunal is not disturbed. (vii) The Registry to send a copy of this judgment to the Tribunal forthwith. Draw award accordingly. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE VNP /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 13