- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103956 OF 2022 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. LAXMI W/O. MANJUNATH KONAPPANAVAR, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD, R/O. LOKUR, TQ. DHARWAD, NOW RESIDING AT INDIRA NAGAR, BAILHONGAL, PIN. 591102, TQ. BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI. 2. KUM. SHIVANAND S/O. MANJUNATH KONAPPANAVAR, AGE: 18 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. LOKUR, TQ. DHARWAD, NOW RESIDING AT INDIRA NAGAR, BAILHONGAL, PIN. 591102, TQ. BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI. 3. KUM. SHREEDHAR S/O. MANJUNATH KONAPPANAVAR, AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. LOKUR, TQ. DHARWAD, NOW RESIDING AT INDIRA NAGAR, BAILHONGAL, PIN. 591102, TQ. BAILHONGAL, DIST. BELAGAVI. APPELLANT NO.3 IS MINOR R/BY. HIS MINOR GUARDIAN AND NATURAL MOTHER I.E. APPELLANT NO.1 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. HANAMANT R. LATUR, ADVOCATE) MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.11 12:10:44 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 AND: 1. SMT. SHOBHA W/O. YALLAPPA TALAWAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. LOKUR, PIN.590001, TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. 2. THE MANAGER ROYAL SUNDARAM INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., 102 AND 103, FIRST FLOOR, CENTRE POINT, OPP. TO SANJEEVI PRESS, NEW COTTON MARKET, HUBBALLI-DHARWAD, KARNATAKA, PIN. 580020, DIST. DHARWAD. 3. SMT. NAGAWWA W/O. BASAPPA KONAPPANAVAR, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O. LOKUR, PIN. 580001, TQ. AND DIST. DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.S. JOSHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1-NOTICE SERVED; NOTICE TO R3 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.04.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.1032/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL BAILHONGAL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This Appeal is filed by the claimants, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal vide the judgment and award dated 01.04.2022 passed in M.V.C.No.1032/2018 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and A.M.A.C.T, Bailhongal. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: On 11.05.2016, at about 1:00 pm, the deceased Manjunath along with coolie workers were proceeding towards Haveri on John Deere Tractor Engine with maize harvesting machine. When they came near the spot of the accident, at that time, the driver of the tractor drove the same at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner and suddenly applied the break. Due to the force, Manjunath fell down on the road and wheel of maize harvesting - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 machine ran over his stomach and caused the accident. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries on his vital parts of the body, and succumbed to the injuries. The claimants being the legal representatives of the deceased Manjunath filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation. Accordingly, prays o allow the claim petition. 3. The owner of the offending Tractor filed a statement of objections, denying the averments made in the claim petition, and contended that the compensation claimed by the claimants is exorbitant. It is contended that as of the date of the accident, the driver of the offending vehicle possessed a valid and effective driving license and the insurance policy was in force. Hence, on these grounds, prays to dismiss the petition against him. 4. The Insurance Company filed its statement of objections, denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is contended that the driver of the offending - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident and no premium was paid towards coolie . Thus, there is a breach of policy conditions and insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. Hence, on these grounds, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company. 5. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 6. The claimants, to substantiate their case, claimant No.1 was examined as PW-1, and marked 8 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-8. The officer the insurance company was examined as RW-1, and marked 2 documents as Exs.R-1 and R-2. 7. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part with cost of Rs.1,500/- vide judgment dated 01.04.2022 and awarded a compensation of Rs.18,21,800/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of the petition, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 till realization of the amount, and held the owner of the offending vehicle is personally liable to pay the compensation, and dismissed the claim petition against the insurance company. The claimant, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, and dismissal of the claim petition against the insurance company, filed this Miscellaneous First Appeal. 8. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the claimants and the insurance company 9. Learned counsel for claimants submits that admittedly, the offending vehicle was insured with the insurance company. The Tribunal has recorded its finding that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident, and the Tribunal should have directed the insurance company to pay the compensation amount at the first instance and recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. He submits that the Tribunal has - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 committed an error in not directing the insurance company to pay the compensation. He also submits that in the absence of income proof, the Tribunal should have taken the notional income of the deceased as per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal. 10. Per contra, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. He submits that there is a breach of policy conditions. Therefore, he submits that the Tribunal was justified in fastening the liability on the owner of the vehicle. He further submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, is just and proper, and do not call for any interference by this court. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 11. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 12. The points that would arise for consideration in this appeal are regarding the liability and quantum of the compensation. Regarding liability: 13. There is no dispute that the deceased Manjunath met with an accident, sustained grievous injuries, and succumbed to the injuries. The claimants, to prove that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, produced a charge sheet marked as Ex. P-6. From perusal of the charge sheet, it discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. The records disclose that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. Hence, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the claim petition against the insurance company and fastening the liability on the owner of the offending vehicle to pay the compensation to the claimants. As the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 vehicle was insured with the insurance company and as of the date of the accident, the policy was in force, the insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation at the first instance and recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. Regarding the Quantum of compensation: 14. Insofar as the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is concerned, the claimants have contended that the deceased was working as a coolie, and used to earn a sum of Rs.15,000/- p.m. To substantiate the income of the deceased, the claimants have not produced any income proof. In the absence of income proof, the notional income has to be assessed as per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The accident occurred in 2016. The notional income should be taken at Rs.8,750/- p.m. The deceased was aged 35 years old as of the date of the accident. 40% of the future prospects is to be added to the income, in view of the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others1. As there are 4 dependents, 1/4th of the notional income is to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased. The applicable multiplier is ‘16’ to the age of 35. Accordingly, the loss of dependency is worked out as follows: Rs.8,750 + Rs.3,500/-(40% of Rs.8,750/-) = Rs.12,250/- Rs.12,250-3,062 (1/4th of Rs.12,250/-) = 9,188/-. Rs.9,188 x 12 x 16 = 17,64,096/- 15. Thus, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.17,64,096/- towards the loss of dependency. There are four claimants. Each claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.48,000/- under the head of loss of consortium (Rs.48,000 x 4 = Rs.1,92,000/-). In addition to it, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.36,000/- under the heads of loss of estate and funeral 1 AIR 2017 SC 5157 - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 expenses. Thus, the claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.19,92,096/- as against Rs.18,21,800/- and enhanced compensation of Rs.1,70,296/-. 16. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The Judgment and award dated 01.04.2022 passed in M.V.C.No.1032/2018 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and A.M.A.C.T, Bailhongal, is hereby modified. (iii) The claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.19,92,096/- as against Rs.18,21,800/-. (iv) Thus, the claimants are entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.1,70,296/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till realization of the amount. (v) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11347 MFA No. 103956 of 2022 accrued interest within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment and recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle in accordance with law. (vi) The office is directed to transmit the trial Court records, forthwith. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE NAA CT:PA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17