- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33344-DB MFA No. 10388 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.10388 OF 2018 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. BHAVANI B. SHETTY AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS W/O. LATE BHOJU SHETTY. 2. BHAVYA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS W/O. PUSHPARAJ SHETTY. 3. BHARATH RAJ SHETTY AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS S/O. LATE BHOJU SHETTY. ALL ARE RESIDING AT KATTINABAILU ULLOR-75 KUNDAPURA TALUK-576 201. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI H. PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. POORNACHANDRA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS S/O. KESHAVA RESIDENT OF MAVINAKODLU KULUNJE VILLAGE KUNDAPURA TALUK-576 201. Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33344-DB MFA No. 10388 of 2018 2. SRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. E-8, EPIP, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA SITAPURA, JAIPURA RAJASTHAN REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI O. MAHESH, ADVOCATE, FOR R-2, AND VIDE ORDER DATED 25-3-2024, NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH) * * * THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V. ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25-11-2017, PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.381 OF 2016, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDITIONAL M.A.C.T., KUNDAPURA, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) This appeal is filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 25-11-2017 passed in M.V.C. No.381 of 2016 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kundapura, whereby, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.10,43,705/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of accident till the date of realisation. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33344-DB MFA No. 10388 of 2018 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are that on 9-12-2015 at 8:30 a.m., when Sri K. Rangayya Shetty (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') was riding motorcycle, bearing Registration No.KA-20 EA-8854, from Karibailu side towards Ampar Side, near Kulunje School, Kulunje Village, Kundapura, the driver of Bolero goods vehicle, bearing Registration No.KA-19 D-8149, drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased, as a result, the deceased sustained grievous injuries and was shifted to the Hospital. On 19-12-2015, the deceased died due to the injuries suffered by him in the accident. Hence, the claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the Tribunal seeking compensation. 4. Heard Sri H. Pavana Chandra Shetty, learned counsel for the appellants/claimants, and Sri O. Mahesh, learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance Company. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33344-DB MFA No. 10388 of 2018 5. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants, strenuously contended that there are three dependents of the deceased. The Tribunal has wrongly deducted 1/4th towards personal and living expenses of the deceased, however, 1/3rd personal deduction has to be taken into consideration. The age of the deceased was 65 years as on the date of the accident. The multiplier applicable to his age group is '7', but the Tribunal has considered it as '5'. Further, the Tribunal has awarded meager compensation on other conventional heads. Hence, he prayed to enhance the compensation. 6. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent No.2- Insurance Company, supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded just and reasonable compensation under each heads, which does not call for interference at the hands of this Court. Thus, he prayed to dismiss the appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33344-DB MFA No. 10388 of 2018 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the appeal papers including original records of the Tribunal, the following point would arise for our consideration in this appeal: Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement? 8. In the case on hand, respondent No.2-Insurance Company has not disputed the accident in question and liability to pay the compensation to the claimants. 9. Insofar as quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal, at paragraph No.20 of its judgment, has rightly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.10,920/- per month. The deceased was aged about 65 years at the time of the accident. Respondent No.2 has not disputed this aspect. As per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of SMT. SARLA VERMA AND OTHERS v. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER reported in 2009 ACJ 1298, multiplier applicable to the age of the deceased is '7'. Claimant No.1 is the wife, claimant No.2 is the married daughter and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33344-DB MFA No. 10388 of 2018 claimant No.3 is the unmarried son of the deceased. Hence, 1/3rd shall be deducted towards his personal and living expenses. Thus, 'loss of dependency' is reckoned as under: 10,920 x 1/3 = 3,640/-. 10,920 - 3,640 = 7,280 x 12 x 7 = Rs.6,11,520/-. 10. In the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. v. NANU RAM ALIAS CHUHRU RAM AND OTHERS reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, the Hon’ble Apex Court by referring to the decision of the Constitution Bench in NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED v. PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, has discussed about granting the compensation under the head of ‘loss of consortium’ and has also issued guidelines for grant of ‘spousal consortium’, ‘parental consortium’ and ‘filial consortium’. The claimants are the wife, married daughter and unmarried son of the deceased. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesaid decision, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.80,000/- (Rs.40,000/- each for wife and son of the deceased) towards - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33344-DB MFA No. 10388 of 2018 ‘loss of consortium’ as against Rs.40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 11. Further, Rs.15,000/- towards 'loss of estate', Rs.15,000/- towards 'funeral expenses', and Rs.4,82,305/- towards 'hospital and medical expenses' awarded by the Tribunal are maintained. 12. Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following compensation: HEADS Rs. Loss of dependency 6,11,520.00 Loss of estate 15,000.00 Loss of consortium 80,000.00 Funeral expenses 15,000.00 Medical expenses 4,82,305.00 TOTAL 12,03,825.00 Less: Compensation awarded by the Tribunal 10,43,705.00 ENHANCED COMPENSATION 1,60,120.00 13. In the result, we pass the following: O R D E R i. The appeal is allowed-in-part. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33344-DB MFA No. 10388 of 2018 ii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated hereinabove. The claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.12,03,825/- as against Rs.10,43,705/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,60,120/- from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of its realisation, excluding interest for delayed period of 287 days in filing the appeal. iii. Respondent No.2-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount together with interest within a period of six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. iv. Apportionment, disbursement and deposit of the enhanced compensation shall be made in terms of the award of the Tribunal. v. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. vi. Draw a modified award accordingly. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33344-DB MFA No. 10388 of 2018 vii. No order as to costs. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the Tribunal along with its record, forthwith. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE KVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22