- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1337 MFA No. 24270 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100016 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.24270 OF 2012 (MV-I) C/W MFA CROSS OBJ NO.100016 OF 2022 IN M.F.A. NO.24270 OF 2012 BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., SUJATHA COMPLEX, OPP. P.B. ROAD, HUBLI, REPRESENTED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, ARIHANT PLAZA, KESHWAPUR-HUBLI-23. …APPELLANT (BY SRI S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SHEKHAPPA S/O. NINGAPPA LAMANI, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: NOT KNOWN, R/O: MAGADI, TQ: SHIRAHATTI, DIST: GADAG, ALSO AT VAKKALIGER ONI, GADAG. 2. SRI. MALLANAGOUDA S/O. YALLAPPAGOUDA HANAMANTGOUDAR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: MAHENDRAKAR BUILDING, NEAR SACHCHINDANAND MATH, H.NO.EWS-69, HUDCO COLONY, GADAG. (OWNER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KA-26/L-9767) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SIDDAPPA S.SAJJAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, PLEASED TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17-07-2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.95/2011 ON THE FILE OF DISTRICT JUDGE AND Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1337 MFA No. 24270 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100016 of 2022 MEMBER, MACT, GADAG, WITH COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN MFA CROSS OBJ NO.100016 OF 2022 BETWEEN: SHEKHAPPA NINGAPPA LAMANI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: MAGADI, NOW R/AT VAKKALAGERI ONI, GADAG, DIST: GADAG-582101. …CROSS OBJECTOR (BY SRI SIDDAPPA S.SAJJAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MALLANAGOUDA YALLAPPAGOUDA HANAMANTHAGOUDAR, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: MAHENDRAKAR BUILDING, NEAR SACHCHIDANAND MATH, H.NO. EWS 69, HUDCO COLONY, GADAG, GADAG-582101. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SUJATH COMPLEX, HUBLI-580029. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1-SERVICE OF NOTICE DISPENSED WITH) THIS CROSS OBJECTION IN MFA NO.24270/2012 IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., PLEASED TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AND AWARD COMPENSATION CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT BY MODIFYING JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.07.2012 PASSED BY THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, GADAG, IN MVC NO.95/2011, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL AND CROSS OBJECTION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1337 MFA No. 24270 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100016 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) MFA No.24270/2012 is filed by insurance company challenging saddling of liability on it with a reason that the claimant is not entitled to compensation as he is a major son of the deceased and was not dependent on the deceased, whereas, MFA Crob No.100016/2022 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by judgment and award dated 17.07.2012 passed in MVC.No.95/2011 by the Court of District Judge and MACT, Gadag (for short, ‘Tribunal’). 2. The facts in brief are that on 16.3.2011 at 9.00 p.m., on Shirahatti-Magadi road near Dabali School, Shirahatti, deceased Sakravva along with others were going towards Magadi by walking on Shirahatti-Magadi road. At that time, one motorcycle bearing No.KA-26/L-9767 being ridden by its rider in a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner came from opposite direction and dashed to Sakravva and caused the accident. Resultantly, Sakravva sustained severe injuries and succumbed to the same. Thus, sought compensation. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1337 MFA No. 24270 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100016 of 2022 3. Heard arguments and perused the material placed on record. 4. In this case, the Tribunal has awarded compensation under various heads as under: Sl. No. Heads. Amount in (Rs.) 1. Loss of dependency. 5,20,000 2. Love and affection. 15,000 3. Loss of estate. 15,000 4. Funeral and obsequies. 10,000 5. Transportation of dead body. 5,000 Total: 5,65,000 5. The Tribunal awarded lesser amount of compensation contrary to the principles of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Therefore, the same is required to be enhanced by modifying the judgment and award of the Tribunal. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant-Insurance Company submitted that the claimant is a major son of the deceased and was aged 21 years old. Therefore, he could not be considered as dependent on the deceased. Hence, there is no question of awarding compensation under the head loss of dependency. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1337 MFA No. 24270 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100016 of 2022 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the claimant- Cross objector submitted that the claimant though was aged 21 years old, but as he was a student and was depending on the income of the deceased, was entitled for compensation under the head of loss of dependency. 8. Considering evidence on record that the claimant was aged 21 years old and was pursuing his studies at the time of accident, the deceased was aged 50 years at the time of accident, it cannot be held that the claimant was not depending on the income of the deceased, since the claimant was a student. Hence, the claimant was depending on the income of the deceased. Therefore, the Tribunal is correct in awarding compensation under the head of loss of dependency. 9. Insofar as quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal has not taken correct parameters. The accident occurred on 16.03.2011. The deceased was aged 50 years old as on the date of accident and was doing agriculture work. Hence, notional income is to be taken at Rs.6,000/- per month, as recognized by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1337 MFA No. 24270 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100016 of 2022 and others, reported in (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680, considering the age of the deceased, 25% of the income is to be added towards loss of future prospects in life. The deceased was married died leaving behind only one dependent. Therefore, 1/3th of the income is to be deducted towards her personal and living expenses. Considering the age of the deceased, the appropriate applicable multiplier is 13. Therefore loss of dependency is re-assessed and quantified at Rs.7,80,000/- (Rs.6,000 + 25% minus 1/3 x 12 x 13). 10. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED V. NANU RAM & OTHERS, reported in 2018 ACJ 2782 and in the case of PRANAY SETHI (SUPRA), the claimant is entitled for Rs.40,000/- under the head ‘loss of consortium’, along with 10% escalation. There is only one dependent i.e., her son. Accordingly, Rs.44,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 1 + 10%) is awarded under the head ‘loss of consortium including loss of love and affection’. Further, the claimant is entitled to Rs.16,500/- each towards loss of estate and funeral expenses including 10% escalation. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1337 MFA No. 24270 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100016 of 2022 11. Thus, the cross-objector/claimant would be entitled to modified compensation on the following heads: 12. Thus, the cross-objector/claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.8,57,000/- as against Rs.5,65,000/- awarded by the Tribunal long with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition till realization. 13. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER a) Both appeals are allowed in part. b) The judgment and award dated 17.07.2012 passed in MVC.No.95/2011 by District Judge and MACT, Gadag is modified to an extent that the cross-objector/claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.8,57,000/- as against Rs.5,65,0000/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The entire compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. Particulars Amount (in Rs.) Loss of dependency 7,80,000/- Loss of estate 16,500/- Funeral expenses 16,500/- Loss of consortium 44,000/- Total 8,57,000/- - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1337 MFA No. 24270 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100016 of 2022 d) The appellant/Insurer shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. e) Apportionment, deposit and disbursement shall be made as per the award of the Tribunal. f) The amount in deposit made by the appellant/Insurance Company be transmitted to the Tribunal along with TCR. g) Draw modified award accordingly. Pending applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and accordingly, they are disposed off. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE PMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 73