- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11321 MFA No. 100067 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100067 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. SMT.SHIVAWWA W/O. MAGUNDAPPA HUGAR AGE:49 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK, 2. SMT GANGAMMA D/O. MAGUNDAPPA HUGAR AGE:29 YEARS, OCC:NIL, 3. TAMANNAPPA S/O. MAGUNDAPPA HUGAR AGE:28 YEARS, OCC:NIL, 4. MAHADEVI D/O. MAGUNDAPPA HUGAR AGE:21 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT, 5. KUMAR S/O. MAGUNDAPPA HUGAR AGE:19 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT, 6. LAXMI D/O. MAGUNDAPPA HUGAR AGE:17 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT, (SINCE PETITIONER NO.6 IS MINOR REP BY MOTHER AS NATURAL GUARDIAN PETITIONER NO.1) 7. SMT. YALLAWWA W/O. SIDDALINGAPPA HUGAR AGE: 76 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, ALL ARE R/O. NADIKESHWAR VILLAGE, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOTE. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. D.V PATTAR ADV FOR SRI. S.S.YALIGAR, ADV) AND: 1. SRI. BASAVRAJ S/O. MALLESHAPPA PALLED AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, (OWNER OF VEHICLE NO. KA-26/6553), MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.15 17:47:50 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11321 MFA No. 100067 of 2019 R/O. KOTABAL, TAL. RON, DIST: GADAG. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD MELLIGERI COMPLEX, BAGALKOTE, DIST: BAGALKOTE. POLICY NO. 240702/31/11/02/00004687 VALID FROM 10/09/2011 TO 09/09/2012. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.S. KOLIWAD, ADV FOR R2, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.10.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.323/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT-VIII, BADAMI, 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: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) 1. This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed by the claimants, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Senior Civil Judge and Member MACT VIII, Badami in MVC No.323/2013 dated 05.10.2015. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11321 MFA No. 100067 of 2019 On 04.04.2012, Magundappa, son of Siddalingappa Hugar, who was riding the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-29/R-9116, met with an accident, and died on the spot due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the Tom- Tom-goods vehicle bearing registration No.KA-26/6553 which came from the opposite directionand dashed to the motorcycle. Hence, the claimants being the legal representatives of the deceased filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking a compensation for the death of the deceased. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. 3. The owner of the goods vehicle, though, appeared through the counsel, did not file his objections to the claim petition. 4. The insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that there is a violation of policy conditions and the driver of the offending vehicle did not hold a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. It is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11321 MFA No. 100067 of 2019 also contended that the offending vehicle was a goods carrying vehicle; however, at the time of the accident, the vehicle was used for carrying passengers for a marriage party which is against the policy conditions. Hence, 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 claimant, to prove their case, claimant No.1 examined herself as PW.1, examined one witness as PWs.2 and marked 12 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-12. Conversely, on the other hand, the Manager of the insurance company was examined as RW.1, and marked 2 documents as Ex.R-1 and R-2. 7. The Tribunal, after assessing verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgment dated 05.10.2015 and awarded a compensation of Rs.4,88,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till its realization and held that the owner of the vehicle is liable to pay the compensation to the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11321 MFA No. 100067 of 2019 claimants and the owner was directed to deposit the compensation amount before the tribunal. 8. The claimants, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal ,and also on the liability, filed this appeal. 9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the claimants, and the learned counsel for the insurance company. 10. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that, in the connected claim petition, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MFA No.101953/2017 disposed off on 13.02.2024, fastened the liability on the insurance company and directed the insurance company to pay the compensation to the claimants in the said appeal. He also submits that the judgment passed in MFA No.101953/2017 has attained finality. Hence, he submits that in the instant case also, the liability be fastened on the insurance company jointly and severally. Insofar as the quantum is concerned, he submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11321 MFA No. 100067 of 2019 Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal and enhance the compensation. 11. Per contra, the learned counsel for the insurance company supports the impugned judgment passed by the Tribunal, and submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper ,and do not call for interreference by this court. Hence, 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 and the liability. 14. There is no dispute regarding the death of Magundappa in the road traffic accident. The Tribunal considering Ex.P-5-charge-sheet which is filed against the driver of the offending vehicle, has rightly recorded a finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11321 MFA No. 100067 of 2019 15. Regarding liability: The insurance company has contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. One Basappa Hullur, who was the pillion rider also, filed a claim petition in MVC No.151/2013 and the said claim petition was allowed by the Tribunal vide judgment and award dated 05.12.2006. The claimant in the said claim petition filed an appeal in MFA No.101953/2017 seeking an enhancement of the compensation. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 13.02.2024 allowed the appeal in part, and fastened the liability on the insurance company by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mukund Dewangan v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited reported in AIR 2017 SC 3668. The judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the aforesaid appeal has attained finality, as the insurance company has accepted the liability fastened on it. Therefore, there is no reason to differ with the findings recorded by the co-ordinate bench of this Court in MFA No.101953/2017. I concur with the findings recorded by the Co-ordinate Bench in - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11321 MFA No. 100067 of 2019 the aforesaid appeal. Therefore, the insurance company is liable to indemnify the owner of the offending vehicle. In view of the same, the point regarding liability is answered accordingly 16. Insofar as quantum is concerned: The claimants to substantiate their case, have not produced any income proof of the deceased. In the absence of the income proof, the Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.4,500/- per month. The Tribunal should have taken the notional income as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka Legal Services Authority. The accident occurred in 2012. The deceased’s income has to be assessed at Rs.6,500/- per month. The deceased was aged 50 years old as of the date of the accident and 10% of future prospectus has to be added in view of the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 i.e., Rs.6,500+650(10%)=Rs.7,150/- There are totally 7 dependents, therefore, 1/5th has to be deducted out of - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11321 MFA No. 100067 of 2019 Rs.7150/- towards the personal expenses of the deceased which comes to Rs.5,720/-. As the deceased was aged 50 years old, the multiplier applicable to the age group of the deceased is ‘13’. Thus, the claimants are entitled to a compensation under the head of loss of dependency at Rs.8,92,320/- (5,720x12x13). Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs. Compensation re-assessed by this Court Rs. 1 Loss of dependency 4,68,000/- 8,92,320/- 2 Loss of consortium (48,000x7) 10,000/- 3,36,000/- 3 Towards funeral expenses and loss of estate 10,000/- 36,000/- TOTAL 4,88,000/- 12,64,320/- 17. Thus, the claimants in all are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.12,64,320/- as against Rs.4,88,000/- awarded by the tribunal. The claimants are entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.7,76,320/-. In view of the same point regarding the quantum is answered accordingly. 18. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11321 MFA No. 100067 of 2019 ORDER i. The Appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award dated 05.10.2015 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge and Member MACT VIII, Badami in MVC No.323/2013, is modified. ii. The claimants are entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.7,76,320/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation of the amount. iii. The owner and insurance company are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount to the claimants. iv. The insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Draw an award accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE kmv CT: BSB