- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14680 MFA No. 102287 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102287 OF 2017 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PARVATI @ PARU W/O. SHANKAR KOKATE, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: SHIVAJI PARK, RAIBAG GRAMEENA, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591317. 2. SHANKAR S/O. TUKARAM KOKATE, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, OCC: NIL, R/O: SHIVAJI PARK, RAIBAG GRAMEENA, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591317. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K. ANANDKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14680 MFA No. 102287 of 2017 1. SRI. RAMACHANDRA S/O. PARAPPA NIDONI @ NIDAWANI, AGED MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS/AGRICULTURE, BHIRADI, TQ: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI-591 315. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, RAMDEV GALLI, DIST: BELAGAVI-590 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.K. SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15-02-2017 PASSED BY THE X ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MEMBER ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT BELAGAVI IN M.V.C. NO.484/2016 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 ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14680 MFA No. 102287 of 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Sri K. Anandkumar, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Sri M.K.Saudagar, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. Challenge in this appeal is the award that is passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi, in MVC 484 of 2016 dated 15.02.2017. This is a claimants’ appeal. 3. The first appellant being the mother and the second appellant being the father of the deceased Shankar Kokate (hereinafter be referred to as ‘the deceased’ for brevity), who died in a road traffic accident that occurred in the year 2015 filed petition claiming compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- in total. The tribunal through the impugned award granted a sum of Rs.7,64,000/- as compensation. With a version that they are entitled to a higher sum the present appeal is filed. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14680 MFA No. 102287 of 2017 4. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellants submit that the tribunal without any justification took the national income of the deceased as Rs.7,000/- per month. Learned counsel also states that the tribunal failed to add future prospects. Learned counsel thereby seeks for revisiting the entire evidence and to award justifiable sum as compensation. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 though states that the compensation granted is justifiable, however seeks the Court to pass appropriate orders basing on the notional income that is being considered by the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad Bench. 6. As per the version of the appellants the deceased was earning Rs.4,00,000/- per annum through agriculture and Rs.6,000/- per month through milk vending business. However no proof is produced to that effect. Therefore considering the fact that the accident occurred in the year 2015 and for the relevant period the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad Bench is taking the notional income as - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14680 MFA No. 102287 of 2017 Rs.8,000/- per month, this Court considers desirable to adopt the said figure. 7. It is not in dispute that the deceased was aged around 27 years by the date of accident. Therefore 40% of the earnings of the deceased are required to be added as 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 deceased died as bachelor, 50% of the earnings of the deceased are required to be deducted towards personal and living expenses which the deceased would have incurred for himself had he been alive and the appropriate multiplier to be applied is ‘17’ as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another2. Thus the compensation which the appellants are entitled to receive towards loss of dependency is as under: Notional monthly income Rs.8,000.00 Annual income Rs.96,000 On adding 40% towards future prospects Rs.1,34,400.00 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14680 MFA No. 102287 of 2017 On deducting 50% towards personal and living expenses Rs.67,200.00 Loss of dependency, on applying appropriate multiplier ‘17’ Rs.11,42,400.00 8. Thus the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.11,42,400/- towards ‘loss of dependency’. Also the appellants are entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards ‘funeral expenses’, Rs.15,000/- towards ‘loss of estate’ and Rs.40,000/- towards ‘loss of filial consortium’. Thus the total compensation which the appellants are entitled to receive is as under: Heads Amount in Rs. Towards loss of dependency 11,42,400.00 Towards funeral expenses 15,000.00 Towards loss of estate 15,000.00 Towards loss of filial consortium 40,000.00 Total 12,12,400.00 9. Therefore the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.12,12,400/- as compensation. Hence the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14680 MFA No. 102287 of 2017 (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi, through orders in MVC 484 of 2016 dated 15.02.2017 is enhanced from Rs.7,64,000/- to Rs.12,12,400/-. (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 enhanced sum, the first appellant is entitled to 60% and the second appellant to 40%. (vi) On deposit, the appellants are permitted to withdraw their respective shares. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE EM CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31