- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22366 MFA No. 467 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 467 OF 2016 (MV-D) BETWEEN: ICICI LOMBARD GEN.INS. CO.LTD., ICICI LOMBARD HOUSE, 414, VEERA SAVARKAR ROAD, SIDDI VINAYAKA TEMPLE, PRABHADEVI, MUMBAI-400 025 NOW REPRESENTED BY MANAGER-LEGAL ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., NO.89, II FLOOR, SVR COMPLEX, HOSUR MAIN ROAD, MADIVALA, BANGALORE-560 068. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. VIJAYA PHANENDRA T.B., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. A.N. KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. SHASHIKALA NAGESH SHETTY, W/O NAGESH SHETTY, NOW AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, 2. NAGESH SHETTY S/O VITTALA SHETTY, NOW AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 3. KUM.POOJA, D/O NAGESH SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT NO.2-17/10, MALLARABETTU, Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22366 MFA No. 467 of 2016 SHANTHINAGARA, KAVOOR POST, MANGALORE-575 015. 4. MANOJ K.N. S/O KUSHALAPPA, MAJOR, R/A 'SRI KRIPA DHAMA', NIRALA BONDANTHILA POST, MANGALORE TALUK-574 191. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R RANJAN KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3, R4 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:18.11.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.518/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & MEMBER, M.A.C.T, MANGALORE, D.K., AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.5,52,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the respondent No.2 - insurer challenging the judgment and award dated 18th November 2015, passed by the II Addl.Senior Civil Judge & Member, MACT, Mangaluru, D.K., (for short `Tribunal), in MVC.No.518/2014. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22366 MFA No. 467 of 2016 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal. 3. The claimants have filed the claim petition under Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, `M.V.Act'). It is the contention of the claimants that, on 09.02.20214, deceased Lohith Shetty was going on his motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-19-EH-5906, along with one Avinash as a pillion rider from Kavoor to his house. At about 11.30 p.m., when they reached in front of Indane Gas, Gandhinagara, the said motorcycle dashed against a standing Tempo bearing registration No.KA-19- AA-1148 and fell down on the road. As a result, both rider and pillion rider sustained grievous injuries. While undergoing treatment, said Lohith Shetty succumbed to the injuries on 19.02.2014. It is the further case of the claimants that, at the time of accident, deceased was aged about 20 years, he was unmarried and working as a mechanic at Tulip Wheel - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22366 MFA No. 467 of 2016 Care, Falnir, Mangaluru and earning Rs.3,500/- per month. Claimants being the parents and unmarried sister, were dependent upon his earnings. With these reasons, they prayed to award the compensation of Rs.10 lakhs. 4. The respondent No.2-insurer denied the contentions of the claimants and further denied its liability to pay the compensation. It also contended that accident occurred due to negligence of the deceased. Therefore, claim petition is not maintainable and liable for dismissal. 5. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues. 6. The claimants to prove their case examined one witness as PW-1 and marked 12 documents as per Exs.P-1 to P-12. The respondents examined one witness as RW-1 and marked 3 documents as per Exs.R-1 to R-3. 7. After hearing both the parties the Tribunal held that accident occurred due to the involvement of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22366 MFA No. 467 of 2016 vehicle belonging to respondent No.1. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased as Rs.3,500/- per month, the age of the deceased as 20 years, applied the multiplier of `17' and awarded the following amount of compensation : Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency 3,57,000/- Loss of love and affection 1,75,000/- Funeral and transportation charges 20,000/- Total 5,52,000/- 8. The main grievance of the appellant is that claimants have not restricted the income of the deceased to Rs.40,000/-. Even the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as Rs.3,500/- per month, which crosses more than Rs.40,000/- per annum. Therefore, the claim petition under Section 163A of M.V.Act is not maintainable. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22366 MFA No. 467 of 2016 9. He further contends that the amount of compensation awarded is also not in accordance with Schedule-II of M.V.Act. Therefore, prayed to recalculate the same and to award just and reasonable amount of compensation as per Schedule-II of M.V.Act. 10. Admittedly, the claim petition was filed under Section 163A of M.V.Act. Compensation shall be awarded as per structured formula - Schedule II. Unless legislature amends the law, the Courts shall follow it. Certain benefits/privileges were given to the claimants who file claim petition under Section 163A of M.V.Act. Hence, amount of compensation to be awarded is restricted as per the Schedule. Section 163A of M.V. Act mainly drafted on the principles of no fault liability and proof of negligence is not required. Therefore, Court shall not calculate compensation in the same manner under the Section 163A and Section 166 of MV Act. Hence, even though income pleaded by the petitioner is more, it shall be restricted to Rs.40,000/- per year. Therefore, the Tribunal ought to - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22366 MFA No. 467 of 2016 have restricted the income of the claimant to Rs.40,000/- p.a., as per Section 163A of M.V.Act. The Tribunal considered the age of the deceased as 20 years, but taken the multiplier as `17', which is incorrect. Since he is unmarried, 50% of his income has to be deducted towards his personal expenses. Therefore, as per the Schedule, the compensation has to be awarded. Accordingly, the claimants are entitled for the following amount of compensation : Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency (Rs.40,000/- x 18/2) 3,60,000/- Funeral expenses 2,000/- Loss of estate 2,500/- Medical expenses 15,000/- Total 3,79,500/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal - 5,52,000/- 11. It appears, the Tribunal has considered the petition as filed under Section 166 of M.V.Act and awarded - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22366 MFA No. 467 of 2016 the amount, which is erroneous, which needs to be rectified. 12. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following : ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated 18th November 2015, passed in MVC.No.518/2014, by the II Addl.Senior Civil Judge, M.A.C.T., Mangaluru, D.K., stands modified. iii) The claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.3,79,500/- as against Rs.5,52,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization. iv) The appellant Insurance Company shall deposit the said amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award. v) The apportionment, release and deposit of the amount are as ordered by the Tribunal. vi) The amount in deposit before this Court shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal for disbursement in accordance with - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22366 MFA No. 467 of 2016 the aforesaid judgment. If there is any excess amount deposited by the insurer, the same shall be refunded to the appellant-insurer. vii) Draw award accordingly. Registry is directed to send back the records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE bk/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22