- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8586 MFA No. 25017 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 25017 OF 2013 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. FATIMA W/O BABU MULLA, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: HALASHI, TALUK: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. MRS. SHAMASHAD W/O JAHOOR DESHPAIK, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK, R/O: HALASHI, TALUK: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. SHRI. IMAM S/O BABU MULLA, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O: HALASHI, TALUK: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI. … APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SANJAY S. KATAGERI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI. JAMES M. VALLADO, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: H.NO.52, TISK, PONSULEM, DHARBANDODA-GOA, DIST: NORTH-GOA. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, IIND FLOOR, MAGJIDADA MANSON, ABOVE DENA BANK, PONDA-GOA, THROUGH THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, RAMDEV GALLI, BELAGAVI. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SHARMILA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1-SERVED) Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8586 MFA No. 25017 of 2013 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.09.2013 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.109/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KHANAPUR, AND AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.12,00,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 18% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF PETITION, TILL THE DATE OF PAYMENT, BY HOLDING RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 HEREIN JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE TO PAY THE COMPENSATION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ARGUMENTS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) 1. The appeal is filed by the claimants questioning the judgment and award passed in MVC No.109/2008 dated 04.09.2013 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Khanapur, whereby the claim petition has been dismissed on the ground that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcycle by the deceased himself. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their rank before the Tribunal. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8586 MFA No. 25017 of 2013 3. Brief facts of the Case: On 01.11.2006, around 4:45 pm between Usgao-Tisk and Molem in Goa, the deceased was riding his motorcycle bearing No.KA-24/E-8365 when a rashly driven Tipper bearing No.KA-24/3351, owned by the first respondent and insured by the second, abruptly turned right and collided with the vehicle. The deceased sustained grievous injuries and died on 09.11.2006 at GMC Hospital, Bambolim. However, the Tribunal dismissed the claim, concluding that the accident was solely due to the deceased's own negligent driving. 4. Heard the learned counsel for both parties and perused the records carefully. 5. Upon considering the facts, circumstances, and evidence, it is noted that Ex.P1 is the accident report, Exs.P2 and P3 are the spot panchanama and hand sketch map, and Ex.P6 is the Accident report. The Insurance Company has also produced documents marked as Exs.R7 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8586 MFA No. 25017 of 2013 and R8, which are the Order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and the Final Report. These documents collectively prove that the death of the deceased is accidental and occurred in a road traffic accident involving the motorcycle and the Tipper. 6. However, the crucial question to be determined is who was rash and negligent in causing the accident. According to the oral evidence of the claimant, examined as PW-1, and the supporting witnesses PW-2 and PW-3, the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the Tipper. 7. On the other hand, the respondent/Insurance Company contends that the deceased himself was negligent in causing the accident. 8. Upon careful consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the only material which is available to ascertain the manner of the accident is Ex.P2 (spot panchanama) and Ex.P3 (hand sketch map). As per the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8586 MFA No. 25017 of 2013 hand sketch map, the deceased was riding his motorcycle on the left side of the road from Usgao-Tisk. The Tipper was approaching from Usgaon and attempted a right turn towards Molem, Goa. The accident occurred at the junction, where the motorcycle collided with the rear left wheel of the Tipper in the middle of the intersection. 9. From the above, it is evident that the deceased, while riding his motorcycle at normal speed on his proper side of the road, ought to have exercised caution while approaching the junction. Similarly, the driver of the Tipper, while taking a right turn at the junction, should have slowed down and taken due care to watch for oncoming vehicles. Failure on both sides to exercise proper caution led to the accident. Therefore, the accident is a result of composite negligence, and both the deceased and the Tipper driver are equally responsible. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8586 MFA No. 25017 of 2013 10. Hence, this Court holds that the deceased contributed 50% negligence, and the driver of the Tipper also contributed 50% negligence in causing the accident. 11. As it is proved that the death of the deceased was accidental and partly due to the negligence of the driver of the Tipper, the claimant is entitled to compensation accordingly. 12. The accident in question is occurred on 01.11.2006. As per the Post-Mortem Report, the deceased was aged about 55 years at the time of accident. The evidence shows that the deceased was a carpenter by occupation in Sanjivini Sahakari Sakkare Karkhane Karkhane Limited. Ex.P9 is his salary certificate, which proves that the deceased was drawing a salary of Rs.9,112/- per month. After statutory deductions, the net salary income comes to Rs.8,074/- per month. 13. The Head timekeeper of the above said Industry (PW-3) has corroborated this fact. The nature of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8586 MFA No. 25017 of 2013 employment was permanent and stable. Therefore, the net income is taken as Rs.8,074/- per month. Adding 15% towards future prospects, the monthly income is recalculated at Rs.9,285/- (8,074 + 1,211). 14. There are three legal heirs; hence, one-third (1/3rd) is to be deducted towards personal expenses. Therefore, the monthly contribution to the family is Rs.6,190/- (2/3rd of Rs.9,285/-). Applying the multiplier of 11 (for the age bracket of 51-55 years), the loss of dependency is calculated as follows: Rs.6,190/- x 12 x 11 = Rs.8,17,080/- 15. Apart from the loss of dependency, the claimants are also entitled to compensation towards conventional heads, namely: Loss of Estate: Rs.16,500/- & Funeral Expenses: Rs.16,500/- including 10% escalation. Loss of Consortium Rs.44,000/- each including 10% escalation - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8586 MFA No. 25017 of 2013 16. Therefore, the total compensation comes to: Rs.8,17,080/- + Rs.16,500/- + Rs.16,500/- + Rs.1,32,000/- = Rs.9,82,080/-. 17. Since the deceased contributed 50% negligence to the accident, the claimants are entitled to 50% of the total compensation, i.e., Rs.4,91,040/-. 18. The claimants shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. 19. In light of the above, the appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is set-aside and the claim petition is partly allowed awarding a compensation of Rs.4,91,040/- with 6% interest per annum. 20. Accordingly, I pass the following ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The judgment and award passed in MVC No.109/2008 of the Tribunal is set aside. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8586 MFA No. 25017 of 2013 (iii) The claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.4,91,040/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. (iv) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the awarded amount within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (v) The claimants shall be entitled to compensation in the ratio of 70:15:15, which shall be released in their favour. (vi) The order of apportionment and deposit as ordered by the Tribunal shall holds good. (vii) The Registry to draw award accordingly and also send the records along with a copy of this judgment to Tribunal forthwith. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE RHR/-CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 105