- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2933 OF 2015 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT K R SHASHIKALA W/O LATE M. R SURESHA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT MADENERALU VILLAGE, KELAGUR POST, ALDUR HOBLI, CHIKMAGALUR TALUK, AND DISTRICT-577111. 2. MASTE M S YASHASH S/O LATE M R SURESHA, AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS, MINOR REPTD. BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER SMT K R SHASHIKALA, RESIDING AT MADENERALU VILLAGE, KELAGUR POST, ALDUR HOBLI, CHIKMAGALUR TALUK, AND DISTRICT-577111. 3. RAMEGOWDA S/O CHANNEGOWDA, 64 YEARS, RESIDING AT MADENERALU VILLAGE, KELAGUR POST, ALDUR HOBLI, CHIKMAGALUR TALUK, AND DISTRICT-577111. Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court Of Karnatka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 4. SMT SHANKARAMMA W/O RAMEGOWDA,54 YEARS, RESIDING AT MADENERALU VILLAGE, KELAGUR POST, ALDUR HOBLI, CHIKMAGALUR TALUK, AND DISTRICT-577111. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. A S GIRISH.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M DHANANJAYA S/O MANJUNATH, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, BUSINESS CUM DRIVER, VEHICLE NO.KA-30-M-15289, R/OF BABALLI VILLAE, BADRA COLONY POST, BHADRAVATHI TALUK, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577301. 2. M G PARAMESHA S/O GURUBASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST CUM R.C.OWNER, VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA-3-M-1528, R/AT GANJUR VILLAGE, NIDIGE HOBLI, SHIMOGA TALUK AND DISTRICT 577202. 3. THE MANAGER UNIVERSAL SHAMPOO GEN.INS.CO.LTD., ANNASALY, THENAMPETE, CHENNAI-600018. BY ITS MANAGER, (INSURER OF VEHICLE NO.KA-30-M-1528) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 4. KRISHNAPPA S/O BABU AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, KOPPAGODU VILLAGE, NAGEHALLI POST, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573115. (RC OWNER OF M/C NO.KA/46/E/5502) 5. THE MANAGER NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., HASSAN BRANCH, CHINTANA COMPLEX, HARSHA MAHAL MARG, HASSAN-573201. BY ITS MANAGER, INSURER OF VEHICLE NO.KA/46/E/5502. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI ASHOK N. PATIL,ADVOCATE FOR R5 SRI S.V. HEGDE MULKHUND, ADVOCATE FOR R3 R1 AND R2 SERVED) MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.11.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.593/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MACT, CHIKMGALUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal, under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, arises out of the common award and judgment dated 22.11.2014, passed by the I Additional District Judge and Member, and MACT at Chikkamagaluru in MVC No.593/2011. 2. The claimants are the wife, son and parents of the deceased and they have filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act, seeking 10,00,000/- compensation with interest for the death of M.R. Suresha, who succumbed to injuries sustained in a road traffic accident on 17.5.2011. 3. The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.6,63,000/- with interest at 6% from the date of the petition until realization after deducting 30% amount for - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 contributory negligence on the part of the deceased himself. The claimants, are appealing, seeking enhancement of the compensation. 4. The learned counsel for the claimants contended that there is no negligence on the part of the deceased, but the Tribunal erred in fixing the contributory negligence of the deceased at 30%. The Tribunal has not considered the evidence of the eye-witness, the pillion rider of the motor vehicle who has been examined and also Investigating Officer who has filed the charge sheet against the driver of the Car bearing No. KA-30 M-1528. Hence, requested to set aside the order. It is further contended that the Tribunal has erred in taking the income as Rs.4,000/- per month and also interest awarded @ 6% needs to enhanced by 9%. It is further contended that the Tribunal has erred in awarding only Rs.10,000/- towards loss of consortium which needs to be enhanced. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the trial court records. 6. The death of M.R. Suresha in a road traffic accident on 17.05.2011, is not disputed. As on the date of the accident, he was 34 years old and he was doing business and real estate and earning Rs.12,000/- per month. The Tribunal erred in taking the income as Rs.4,000/- per month. In the absence of proof, the notional income of the deceased is assessed at Rs.6,500/- per month as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka Legal Service Authority. 7. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the dictum of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi1, held that the future prospects of income of the self-employed deceased shall also be included in determination of the compensation. Thus, considering the age of the deceased, 40% of the income has to be added 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 towards future prospects and thus the amount would become Rs.9,100/- per month. 8. As per the guidelines of the Hon’ble Apex Court in dictum of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation2, if the deceased was married, 1/4th of his income has to be deducted as there are 4 dependents towards his personal expenses. Thus, the income of the deceased after deducting personal expenses comes to Rs.6,825 /-per month. As the deceased was aged 35 years, the multiplier of 16 is to be taken. Therefore, the claimants are entitled for Rs.13,10,400/- (6,500 x 40% = 2,600 + 6,500 = 9,100-2275) = (6825 x 12 x 16 ) towards loss of dependency. 9. However, as prescribed in the dictum of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 Sethi, Rs. 30,000/- is granted under the head loss of estate, funeral estate etc. 10. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, by reiterating the comprehensive interpretation of ‘consortium’ given in the authority of Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram & others3, and in the authority between United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur and others4, fortified that the amounts for loss of consortium shall be awarded to the children who lose the care and protection of their parents as ‘parental consortium’ and to the parents as, ‘filial consortium’ for the loss of their grown-up children, to compensate their agony, love and affection, care and companionship of deceased children. 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 4 (2020) 9 SCC 644 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 11. Accordingly, it is just and reasonable to award Rs.40,000/- to the wife, Rs.40,000/- to son and Rs.40,000/- each to the parents of the deceased towards love and affection (Rs.40,000 x 4) instead of Rs.10,000/- which comes to Rs.1,60,000/- towards loss of consortium. 12. The Tribunal has taken into account the medical expenses at Exs.P.12 and P.33, which indicated an amount of Rs.52,000/- spent towards medical expenses for the treatment of the deceased. The same is considered under the head Medical expenses by the Tribunal and same does not warrant interference. 13. With regard to fixing 30% contributory negligence on the part of the deceased, when the deceased M.R. Suresh was proceeding on his Motor Cycle bearing No.KA46/E 5502 along with the pillion rider, while so proceeding, in front of the shop of one Nagaraja Shetty, in order to go to the shop, he put right side indicator and also gave hand signal. At that time, the driver of the Car - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 bearing No.KA 30/M 1528 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle of the deceased. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries to his vital parts, and immediately he was shifted to the hospital, and after four days, he succumbed to the injuries. 14. It is stated that P.W.3 and P.W.4 who are the eye-witnesses to the occurrence of the accident have been examined and also Ex.P.1 is the charge sheet filed against the driver of the car of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal considering the arguments of the both sides fixed the contributory negligence on the rider of motor cycle @ 30%. 15. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the claimants that it is for the Insurance Company to prove the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased and they have not examined the driver of the car. But the Tribunal has observed that the person who was crossing the road should be more careful. As per IMV report Ex.P.8, left side of the motor cycle was damaged as - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 the deceased has taken the motor cycle to extreme right side of the road, the Tribunal has observed that, if the deceased rode the motor cycle slowly and cautiously, he could have avoided the accident, therefore, fixing the contributory negligence on the deceased is slightly modified to 15% instead of 30%. 16. The claimants are entitled to a compensation amount of Rs.1,90,000/- towards consortium, loss of estate, and funeral expenses. In total, they are entitled to a sum of Rs. 15,52,400/- as against Rs.6,63,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% from the date of petition till the date of realization. 17. To the aforesaid extent, the judgment passed by the Tribunal is modified. The insurer is directed to deposit 85% of the compensation with interest accrued within one month from the date of this order. 18. Apportionment can be taken as per the order passed by the Tribunal. On such deposit the claimants are - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37526 MFA No. 2933 of 2015 permitted to withdraw the same along with accrued interest. 19. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE HR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34