- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 23056 OF 2013 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. HANAMANT S/O. KESHAPPA DANDAGI @ DOSAR AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE WORK, R/O.SAUNDATTI BANDI ONI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DT: BELGAUM. 2. VINAYAK S/O HANAMANTH DANDAGI @ DOSAR AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE R/O. BANDI ONI SAUNDATTI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DT: BELGAUM. 3. VISHWANATH S/O. HANAMANTH DANDAGI @ DOSAR AGE: 17 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. BANDI ONI SAUNDATTI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DT: BELGAUM 4. KUMARI VIJAYALAXMI D/O. HANAMANTH DANDAGI @ DOSAR AGE: 13 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT R/O. BANDI ONI SAUNDATTI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DT: BELGAUM APPELLANTS NO.3 & 6 ARE MINORS R/BY BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN- FATHER APPELLANT NO.1) …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. HUSENSAB S/O. MOULASAB KILARI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O.RENUKA NAGAR SAUNDATTI DIST: BELGAUM MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 (OWNER OF MAHENDRA NEW PASSENGER VEHICLE BEARING TEMPORARY REGISTRATION NO. KA-22/TEMP-782) 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, P.B.NO.207, LEA COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, NEAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION DHARWAD-580008 (INSURER OF MAHENDRA NEW PASSENGER VEHICLE BEARING TEMPORARY REGISTRATION NO. KA-22/TEMP-782) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S. ARANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO, ALLOW THE APPEAL AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD BY ENHANCING COMPENSATION IN M.V.C. NO.2427/2011 DATED 02.02.2013 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. MACT, SAUNDATTI UNDER ALL PERMISSIBLE HEADS. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 ORAL JUDGMENT This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘M.V.Act, 1988” for short) by the petitioners, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded vide judgment and award dated 02.02.2013, passed in MVC No.2427/2011 by the learned Senior Civil Judge & Additional MACT, Saundatti, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’ for short). 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal, are as follows: On 08.04.2011, the deceased Smt. Anasuya and others had been to Yamanur from Saundatti to take darshan of Yamanur God. In the evening at about 6.00 p.m., they reached Yamanur, and they left Yamanur at about 12.00 a.m., in a Mahendra new passenger vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-22/Temp-782. The driver of the said vehicle drove the same in a rash and negligent manner at a - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 high speed. As a result, the vehicle toppled down. Due to the said impact, the deceased Smt.Anasuya sustained grievous, and succumbed to the injuries. Thus, the legal representatives of the deceased Smt.Anasuya filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V.Act seeking compensation for the death of the deceased. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. 3. Although the owner of the offending vehicle appeared through counsel; However, he did not file a statement objections. 4. The Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident, and there is a violation of the policy conditions. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the Insurance Company. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 5. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 6. To substantiate their case, petitioner No.1 was examined as P.W.1, one witness was examined as P.W.2, and 8 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P8. Conversely, the respondents before the Tribunal, did not lead any oral evidence; however, one document was marked as Ex.R1 with consent, i.e., the Insurance Policy. 7. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part with costs vide judgment dated 02.02.2013, and awarded a compensation of Rs.4,62,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till its realization. The Owner and the insurance company were held jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. 8. The petitioners, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, filed this Miscellaneous First Appeal. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the Insurance Company. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the deceased was doing a bakery business and used to earn Rs.10,000/- p.m. He submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, she prays to allow the appeal by enhancing the compensation. 11. Per contra, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. He submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and do not call for any interference at the hands of this court, and accordingly, prays to dismiss the appeal. 12. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 13. The point that would arise for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 Reg. Quantum of compensation: 14. There is no dispute that Smt.Anasuya died due to the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. To prove the accident, the petitioners have produced a chargesheet at Ex.P-7 which is filed against the driver of the offending vehicle. 15. The petitioners have contended that the deceased Smt.Anasuya was doing a bakery business and used to earn Rs.10,000/- p.m. The petitioners have not produced any documents to prove the income of the deceased. In the absence of proof of income, the notional income must be assessed as per the scheduled notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Hence, the notional income is taken at Rs.6,000/- p.m., as the accident occurred in 2011. In addition to it, 40% towards the future prospects has to be added, as per the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, which comes to Rs.8,400/-. The deceased was about 32 years old, as shown in the postmortem report, wherein this court takes the age of the deceased as 36 years old, and thereby, 1/4th of her income must be deducted towards her personal expenses, which comes to Rs.6,300/- (Rs.8,400/- less Rs.2,100/-). The multiplier applicable to the age group of the deceased is ‘15’. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to a compensation of Rs.11,34,000/- (Rs.6,300/-x 12 x 15) under the head loss of dependency. There are four claimants/ Petitioners, and they are entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,92,000/- (Rs.48,000/- x 4) under the head of loss of consortium, and Rs.36,000/- under the heads of funeral expenses and the loss of estate. 16. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to a total compensation, which is as follows: - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 Particulars Compensation amount in (Rs.) Loss of dependency (Rs.6,300/-x 12x 15) 11,34,000/- Loss of consortium (Rs.48,000/- x 4) 1,92,000/- Funeral expenses and loss of Estate 36,000/- Total 13,62,00/- Compensation awarded by the Tribunal 4,62,000/- Enhanced compensation 9,00,000/- 17. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.13,62,000/- as against Rs.4,62,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till realization of the amount. The petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs. 9,00,000/-. In view of the same, the point is answered accordingly. 18. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and the award dated 02.02.2013, passed in MVC No.2427/2011 by the learned Senior Civil Judge & Additional MACT, Saundatti, is hereby modified. iii) The petitioners are entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 13,62,000/- as against Rs.. 4,62,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till realisation i.e., to an enhanced compensation of Rs. 9,00,000/-. iv) The apportionment and deposit of the compensation amount shall be in terms of the Judgment of the Tribunal. v) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount with interest within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12574 MFA No. 23056 of 2013 vi) The Tribunal records, and the amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal concerned, forthwith. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE MBS CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8