- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35771 MFA No. 4503 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4503 OF 2024 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. MARIYAPPAN K S/O KATHRIVELU F/O LATE RAJKUMAR MARIYAPPAN AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS 2. SMT PANDIYAMMAL M W/O MARIYAPPAN M/O LATE RAJKUMAR MARIYAPPAN AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS 3. SRI PRAKASH RAJ S/O MARIYAPPAN B/O LATE RAJKUMAR MARIYAPPAN AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS 4. KUM KONAGAVALLI M D/O MARIYAPPAN AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS SINCE 4TH APPELLANT IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SRI. MARIYAPPAN ALL ARE APPELLANTS R/AT NO.2-516, SENTHILNAGAR, KANNANENTHAL THIRUPALAVI (V) (P) Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35771 MFA No. 4503 of 2024 MADURAI TAMILNADU - 625 014 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K.V. NAIK. ,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. PANDU S/O MAYANNA, MAJOR R/AT NO.446, 28TH WARD VINAYAKANAGARA 13TH CROSS, CHANNAPATNA TOWN AND TQ RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160 (OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE, (TVS JUPITER) BEARING REG NO.KA-42-X-9315 2. THE MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.9/2, 2ND FLOOR, MOTOR T.P. HUB MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M G ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN REDDY N.A, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 - NOTICE IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 09.09.2025) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.02.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.464/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-5), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35771 MFA No. 4503 of 2024 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT At request of both the learned counsel i.e., Sri. K.V.Naik learned counsel for the appellants as well as Sri. Mallikarjuna Reddy N.A who represents Sri. B.C.Shivanne Gowda learned counsel on record for respondent No.2, the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal. 2. Challenge in this appeal is the order that is rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore in M.V.C No. 464/2023 dated 13.02.2024. This is a claimants appeal. 3. The father, the mother, the brother and the sister of the deceased Rajkumar Mariyappan (herein after referred to as 'deceased' for brevity) who died in a road traffic accident filed a petition claiming compensation of Rs.40,00,000/- in total. The tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum of Rs.26,19,882/- as compensation. Projecting that they are entitled to a higher sum the present appeal is filed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35771 MFA No. 4503 of 2024 4. Arguing the matter learned counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased was working in a flour mill and was earning ₹25,000/- per month by the date of accident. Without considering the income of the deceased the tribunal simply took the notional income of the deceased as ₹13,821/- per month and awarded meager sum as compensation and aggrieved by the same the present appeal is filed. Learned counsel further submits that the accident occurred in the year 2022 and for the relevant period even the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as ₹15,500/- per month for settlement of claims and at least that figure would have been adopted by the tribunal. 5. Learned counsel who represents respondent No. 2 on the otherhand contends that the tribunal awarded huge sum as compensation and indeed the appellants are not entitled to such an amount. Learned counsel submits that the tribunal unjustifiably awarded ₹1,60,000/- under the head loss of filial consortium which is against the mandate of law. 6. The appellants failed to produce any substantive proof with regard to the occupation and income of the deceased by - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35771 MFA No. 4503 of 2024 the date of accident. However, considering the submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellants, this Court intends to take the notional income of the deceased as ₹15,500/- per month. On taking the notional income as ₹15,500/- per month and without distributing other parameters that is adding 40% towards future prospects, deducting 50% towards the personal and living expenses which the deceased would have incurred for himself had he been alive and applying the appropriate multiplier '18', the compensation which the appellants are entitled to under the head loss of dependency is as under:- Heads Amount in Rs. Notional income 15,500.00 Annual income 1,86,000.00 On adding 40% towards future prospects 2,60,400.00 On deducting 50% towards personal and living expenses 1,30,200.00 Loss of dependency on applying appropriate multiplier '18' 23,43,600.00 7. Thus, the appellants are entitled to a sum of ₹23,43,600/- under the head loss of dependency. Together with the said amount the appellants No.1 and 2 being the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35771 MFA No. 4503 of 2024 parents of the deceased are entitled to ₹44,000/- under the head loss of filial consortium. Further, the appellants are entitled to ₹16,500/- towards loss of estate and ₹16,500/- towards funeral expenses. Also the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.3,40,298/- towards medical expenses. Thus, the total sum which the appellants are entitled to as compensation is as under:- Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency 23,43,600.00 Loss of filial consortium 44,000.00 Loss of estate 16,500.00 Funeral expenses 16,500.00 Medical expenses 3,40,298.00 Total 27,60,898.00 8. In the light of the above discussion the appeal is disposed of with the following:- ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore through orders - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35771 MFA No. 4503 of 2024 in M.V.C. No.464/2023 dated 13.02.2024 is enhanced from ₹26,19,882/- to ₹27,60,898/-. iii. The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. iv. Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. v. The apportionment made by the tribunal applies to enhanced sum as well. vi. On deposit, appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are permitted to withdraw their respective shares. vii. Appellant No. 3 is permitted to withdraw his share subject to producing sufficient proof that he attained the age of majority. viii. The amount that falls to the share of appellant No.4 shall be kept in any interest yielding fixed deposit scheme of any nationalized bank until she attains - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35771 MFA No. 4503 of 2024 the age of majority. On she attaining the age of majority, she is permitted to withdraw her entire share. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9 CT: BHK