- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14909 MFA No. 102361 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102361 OF 2015 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SHRI REVAPPA S/O. BHIMAPPA ALAGUNDI, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S. 1A) SMT. GANGAWWA W/O. REVAPPA ALAGUNDI, AGE: 43 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: KATAKABHAVI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. 1B) MAHADEVI D/O. REVAPPA ALAGUNDI, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: NIL. 1C) SUVARNA D/O. REVAPPA ALAGUNDI, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: NIL. 1D) RUKMAWWA D/O. REVAPPA ALAGUNDI, AGE: 18 YEARS, OCC: NIL. GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14909 MFA No. 102361 of 2015 ALL ARE R/O: KATAKABHAVI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SANTOSH S. HATTIKATAGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI HALAPPA S/O. LAXMAN PAKANDI, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DEVAPURHATTI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., MAHADEV PLAZA CTS NO.10719, SY NO.135/A, NEAR KOLHAPUR CIRCLE, NEHRU NAGAR, BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIM TRIBUNAL, RAIBAG IN MVC.NO.558/2012 DATED 01.04.2015 AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE CLAIM PETITION, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14909 MFA No. 102361 of 2015 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Sri Santosh S. Hattikatagi, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Sri Suresh S. Gundi, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. This appeal is the outcome of the award that is passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raibag, in MVC 558 of 2012 dated 01.04.2015. 3. As per the material available on record, Sri Revappa, who sustained injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred on 23.12.2011 filed a petition claiming compensation. During the pendency of the proceedings he died. The appellants herein came on record as the legal representatives of the deceased Revappa (hereinafter be referred to as ‘the deceased’ for brevity). 4. The tribunal, exhibiting its opinion that the appellants are not entitled for compensation towards ‘loss of dependency’, awarded the amount that was actually incurred towards ‘medical expenses’, ‘conveyance and attendant - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14909 MFA No. 102361 of 2015 charges’ etc. Projecting that they are entitled to compensation towards ‘loss of dependency’ and other heads, the present appeal is filed by the legal representatives of the deceased. 5. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellants submits that within 4 months from the date of accident, the deceased died at hospital while taking treatment. The death is the direct result of the injuries sustained. Though sufficient material to that effect was produced before the tribunal, yet the tribunal, discarding all the evidence produced, awarded very meagre sum as compensation and therefore the present appeal is filed. Learned counsel thereby seeks to award the amount that the appellants are entitled to towards ‘loss of dependency’, towards ‘funeral expenses’, towards ‘loss of estate’ and towards ‘loss of consortium’. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 on the other hand submits that the appellants failed to examine any doctor to state that the injuries resulted in the death of the deceased and therefore the award of the tribunal needs no interference. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14909 MFA No. 102361 of 2015 7. It is not in dispute that the accident occurred on 23.12.2011 and the deceased died on 22.04.2012. Also it is not in dispute that the deceased died during the course of treatment and immediately after the death, post mortem was conducted. Also it is not in dispute that basing on the requisition given by concerned police, the hospital authorities gave report regarding the cause of death. The contents of Ex.P14 letter that was addressed by Dr.Dhareppa G. Chougala, the Chief Consultant Physician of KLE ICU Gokak to the Sub- Inspector of Police, Regional Police Circle, Raibag reads as under. “From- Dr.Dhareppa G. Chougala, Chief Consultant Physician, KLE ICU, Gokak. To- Police Sub Inspector, Regional Police Circle, Raibag Taluka, Raibag. Sub: Regarding Cause of Death of Mr.Revappa Bhimappa Alagundi. Sir, In response to your letter dated 17.10.2012, regarding the cause of death of Mr.Revappa Bhimappa Alagundi, Age : 45 years, Male, resident of Khadakbhavi, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14909 MFA No. 102361 of 2015 Taluka: Raibag. Mr.Revappa.Bhimappa.Alagundi had met with Accident and had developed fracture’s, and traumatic paraplegia in December-2011, for which he was treated by Dr.M.G.Umarani, Orthopidician, Gokak. However, due to his bed hidden state and severe injury he developed Septicemia with Hepatitis and acute Renal failure and Anemia. Hence, the complications are associated with the injury that he developed due to Accident. Due to the complications he expired. He was treated by Dr.M.G.Umarani for all his injury. However, when he developed, these severe complications he was transferred to KLE ICU Gokak for ICU Care on 21.04.2012 at 6:00 pm, and expire on 22.04.2012 at 1:50 pm. Kindly note and do the needful. Date : 05.11.2012 Place : Gokak. Sd/- Dr.Dhareppa G. Chougala, Chief Consultant Physician, KLE ICU GOKAK.” 8. Also Ex.P15 post mortem report clearly reveals that the death is due to hepatitis. There is a clear mention in Ex.P14 that due to bed-ridden state and severe injury, the deceased developed septicemia with hepatitis coupled with acute renal failure and anemia and those complications are associated with the injury sustained due to the accident. Thus it is clear that the death of the deceased is due to the injuries sustained. Therefore this Court is of the view that the appellants are certainly entitled to compensation being the legal heirs and dependents of the deceased. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14909 MFA No. 102361 of 2015 9. Though it is claimed that the deceased as mason was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, no substantive proof is produced to that effect. The accident occurred in the year 2011. For the relevant period, the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad Bench is taking the notional income as Rs.6,000/- per month for settlement of claims. Hence as rightly sought for by the learned counsel for the applicants, the notional income of the deceased is taken as Rs.6,000/- per month. 10. By all the evidence produced, the appellants succeeded in establishing that the deceased was aged around 45 years as on the date of accident. Thus 25% of the earnings of the deceased are required to be added towards future prospects as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi1. Further as the dependents being four in number i.e., a wife and three children, 1/4th of the earnings are required to be deducted towards ‘personal and living expenses’ which the deceased 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14909 MFA No. 102361 of 2015 would have incurred for himself had he been alive and likewise the appropriate multiplier to be applied is ‘14’ as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another2. With these parameters, the compensation which the appellants are entitled to receive towards ‘loss of dependency’ is as under: Notional monthly income Rs.6,000/- Annual income Rs.72,000/- On adding 25% towards future prospects Rs.90,000/- On deducting 1/4th towards personal and living expenses 67,500/- Loss of dependency, on applying appropriate multiplier ‘14’ 9,45,000/- 11. Thus the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.9,45,000/- towards ‘loss of dependency’. 12. Also the appellants are entitled to Rs.2,14,881/- towards ‘medical expenses’, Rs.10,000/- towards ‘conveyance and attendant charges, which the appellants would have incurred during the course of treatment of the deceased at hospital, Rs.10,000/- towards ‘funeral expenses’ and 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14909 MFA No. 102361 of 2015 Rs.10,000/- towards ‘loss of estate’. Also the appellants are entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards ‘loss of consortium’. 13. Thus the total sum which the appellants are entitled to receive as compensation is as under: Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency 9,45,000.00 Medical expenses 2,14,881.00 Towards conveyance and attendant charges 10,000.00 Towards funeral expenses 10,000.00 Towards loss of estate 10,000.00 Towards loss of consortium 40,000.00 Total 12,29,881.00 14. Thus it is clear that the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.12,29,881/-. Therefore 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, Raibag through orders in MVC 558 of 2012 dated 01.04.2015 is enhanced from Rs.2,24,881/- to Rs.12,29,881/-. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14909 MFA No. 102361 of 2015 (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 8 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. (v) Out of the total sum that is awarded as compensation, the first appellant is entitled to Rs.4,79,881/-. Appellants 2 to 4 are entitled to a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- each. (vi) On deposit, the appellants are permitted to withdraw their respective shares. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE EM CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 73