- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37733 MFA No. 2054 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2054 OF 2020(MV-D) BETWEEN: CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER DARE HOUSE, 2ND FLOOR NO.2, NSC BOSE ROAD CHENNAI-600 001 HEREIN REPRESENTED BY ITS OFFICE AT UNIT NO.04 9TH FLOOR, GOLDEN HEIGHTS COMPLEX 59TH CROSS, 4TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 010 BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER (CLAIMS) …APPELLANT (BY SRI. LINGARAJ H S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SALMA NOW AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS W/O SHABBIR 2. SHABBIR ALIAS MOHAMMED SHABBIR NOW AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O AMEER BHASHA 3. ISHU NOW AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS Digitally signed by NANDINI R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37733 MFA No. 2054 of 2020 D/O SHABBIR SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY MOTHER NATURAL GUARDIAN RESPONDENT NO.1 HEREIN RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 ARE R/O KUPPALU VILLAGE AND POST KADUR TALUK CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT 4. DADAPEER K NOW AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS S/O KHULAISAB R/O NO.2, BIDAREKERE ROAD NEAR MASJID ASHWATHAREDDYNAGAR JAGALUR, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT 5. SRINIVASA B K NOW AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS S/O KANDAGALLARA BASAVARAJAPPA R/O LOKIKERE VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ABHIRAJ B CHENGTI., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; R3 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY R1) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.11.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.538/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, KADUR, CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.8,91,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 7 PERCENT P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE REALIZATION. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37733 MFA No. 2054 of 2020 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and respondents. 2. The short point that arises is whether the compensation of ₹8,91,000/- awarded by the Tribunal on account of death of a boy aged 8 years in the road traffic accident is adequate or not. 3. The records reveal that the deceased Sufiyan met with an accident on 20.05.2017. While he was a pedestrian, a lorry bearing Regn. No.KA-17-B-5994 came from the other side, and dashed him resulting in his death. The parents and younger sister of the deceased-Sufiyan filed a claim petition before the Tribunal (Senior Civil Judge and MACT at Kadur, Chikkamagaluru District) in MVC No.538 of 2017and the Tribunal assessed the compensation under different heads as below: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37733 MFA No. 2054 of 2020 1. Loss of dependency - ₹8,10,000/- 2. Loss of love and affection - ₹ 25,000/- 3. Funeral expenses - ₹ 15,000/- 4. Transportation of dead body - ₹ 5,000/- 5. Medical expenses - ₹ 36,000/- ---------------- Total - ₹8,91,000/- ---------------- 4. The respondent No.3 - Insurance Company is before this Court contending that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant - Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal erred in assessing the compensation to the tune of ₹8,91,000/-, and it being on the higher side, there is a need for indulgence by this Court. He contends that the loss of dependency does not stand for any reason, since the deceased was not an earning member, and even he was below the age of 15 years. He also contends that the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 7% is on the higher side. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents/ claimants submits that there is no any error committed by the Tribunal in assessing the compensation, and the same is adequate, just and proper. He also contends that the deceased - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37733 MFA No. 2054 of 2020 boy was a bright student, and therefore, the Tribunal has adequately compensated the petitioners. 7. A careful perusal of the records would reveal that the Tribunal had placed a reliance on several decisions in coming to such conclusion. It is worth to note that this Court in the case of Sagar -vs- Umesh in MFA No.201430/2023 (DD 19.06.2025) has held that there cannot be any reason for reducing the multiplier on account of the deceased being a minor boy. It was held that the distinction between an adult, who either suffers the injury or dies in the accident, cannot in any way be differentiated from a minor simply because, the future of a minor is not known, and there are various imponderables, which act in shaping his future; reducing the notional income would not stand for any reason. It was also noticed by this Court that the notional income emanates from the fundamental principle that there is a statutory recognition for the minimum wages permissible under the Minimum Wages Act. Therefore, if any minor attains majority and starts earning, his wages cannot be less than the wages fixed under the Minimum Wages Act. In that analogy, this Court had held that - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37733 MFA No. 2054 of 2020 the wages as well as the multiplier should be as that is applicable to a person, who is aged about 18 to 20 years. Under these circumstances, there is no justification for the contentions of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. The quantum of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, on this count cannot be interfered with. 8. So far as the interest is concerned, it is fairly settled principle of law that the rate of interest shall be at 6%, as held this Court in the case of Ms.Joyeeta Bose, -vs- Venkateshan.V in MFA No.5896/2018 c/w MFA Nos.4444/2018 & 4659/2018 (DD 24.08.2020). Therefore, the appeal deserves to be allowed in part, only in respect of the rate of interest. Hence the following ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part. ii) The petitioners/claimants are entitled for the compensation amount as determined by the Tribunal. But, however, the rate of interest shall be at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37733 MFA No. 2054 of 2020 iii) Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation within eight weeks from today. iv) Rest of the order passed by the Tribunal regarding apportionment, deposit etc. remains unaltered. v) The amount in deposit is ordered to be transferred to the Tribunal. Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11