- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH 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.1902 OF 2022 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1461 OF 2021 (MV-D) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1716 OF 2022 (MV-D) IN MFA No.1902/2022 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. DHANALAKSHMI W/O. LATE HARISH S.N. AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS HOUSEHOLD WORK. 2. CHETHANA H. D/O. LATE HARISH S.N. AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER NATURAL MOTHER-APPELLANT NO.1 AS GUARDIAN BOTH ARE RESIDENTS OF SIDLIAHANAKOTE HIRIYUR TALUK NOW RESIDING AT NANNIVALA VILLAGE CHALLAKERE TALUK-577 522. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI A.K. SREEHARSHA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE NAGARAJA, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 AND: 1. M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER MAGANOOR BASAPPA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, P.B. ROAD CHITRADURGA TOWN-577 501. 2. SYED IMARAN S/O. SYED JAFAR AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS OWNER OF BABA TRANSPORT RESIDENT OF NO.86 OLD MADRAS ROAD, DURGA MOHALLA NEAR K.R. PURAM RAILWAY STATION BENGALURU-560 016. 3. NIJALINGAPPA S/O. BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS AGRICULTURIST. 4. VIJAYAMMA W/O. NIJALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS HOUSE HOLD WORK BOTH RESPONDENT NOS.3 AND 4 ARE RESIDENTS OF SIDLIAHANAKOTE HIRIYUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 598. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI D. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI N.R. RANGEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-3 AND R-4; VIDE C/O DATED 30-05-2022, NOTICE TO R-2 IS DISPENSED WITH) * * * THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15-12-2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.237 OF 2019 ON THE FILE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, CHALLAKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO.1461/2021 BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED MAGANOOR BASAPPA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX P.B. ROAD CHITRADURGA TOWN-577 501 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER LEGAL NO.28, 5TH FLOOR, EAST WING, CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD BENGALURU-560 001. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI D. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. DHANALAKSHMI W/O. LATE HARISH S.N. AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS HOUSE HOLD WORK. 2. CHETHANA H. D/O. LATE HARISH S.N. AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT SIDLIAHANAKOTE HIRIYUR TALUK-577 302 NOW RESIDING AT NANNIVALA VILLAGE CHALLAKERE TOWN-577 522. SINCE THE RESPONDENT NO.2 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT.DHANALAKSHMI-RESPONDENT 1. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 3. SRI SYED IMARAN S/O. SYED JAFAAR AGED 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.86, OLD MADRAS ROAD DARGA MOHALLA NEAR K.R.PURAM RAILWAY STATION BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU-560 016 (OWNER OF BABA TRANSPORT LORRY). 4. SRI NIJAKUNGAPPA S/O. BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS AGRICULTURIST. 5. SMT. VIJAYAMMA S/O. NIJALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS HOUSE HOLD WORK RESPONDENT NOS.4 AND 5 ARE RESIDING AT SIDLIAHANAKOTE HIRIYUR TALUK-577 302. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI A.K. SREEHARSHA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R-1; R-2 MINOR REPRESENTED BY R-1; SRI N.R. RANGEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 AND R-5; VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 21-7-2025, NOTICE TO R-3 IS DISPENSED WITH) * * * THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15-12-2020, PASSED IN MVC NO.237 OF 2019, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, CHALLAKERE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.23,77,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9 PERCENT P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DATE OF REALIZATION. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 IN MFA NO.1716/2022 BETWEEN: 1. NIJALINGAPPA S/O. BASAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS. 2. VIJAYAMMA W/O. NIJALINGAPPA BOTH ARE RESIDING AT SIDLIAHANAKOTE, HIRIYUR TALUK. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI N.R. RANGEGOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DHANALAKSHMI W/O. LATE HARISH S.N. AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS. 2. CHETHANA H. S/O. LATE HARISH S.N. AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS MINOR REPRESENTED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 ARE RESIDING AT SIDLIAHANAKOTE HIRIYUR TALUK NOW RESIDING AT NANNIVALA VILLAGE CHALLAKERE TALUK. 3. SYED IMARAN S/O. SYED JAFAR NOW AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS RESIDING AT 86, OLD MADRAS ROAD DARGA MOHALLA, NEAR K.R. PURAM RAILWAY STATION, BENGALURU NORTH BENGALURU-560 016. 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. MAGANOOR BASAPPA COMMERCIAL COMPLEX - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 P.B. ROAD CHITRADURGA TOWN-577 501. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI A.K. SREEHARSHA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SPOORTHY HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 AND R-2; SRI D. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-4; VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 21-7-2025, NOTICE TO R-3 IS IS DISPENSED WITH) * * * THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15-12-2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.237 OF 2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, CHALLAKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS ARE 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) Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondents. MFA No.1902/2022 is filed by the appellants(wife and daughter of deceased Harish S.N.), MFA No.1461/2021 is filed by the Insurance company and MFA No.1716/2022 is filed by the appellants(parents of deceased Harish S.N.) challenging the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 judgment and award dated 15.12.2020 passed in MVC No.237/2019 on the file of Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Challakere, whereby, the Tribunal granted compensation of Rs.23,77,000/-. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case of the claimants before the Tribunal is that on 23.12.2018, one Sri. Harish S.N., alongwith claimants Nos.1 and 2 was driving Ashoka Leyland vehicle bearing registration No.KA-16-C-7645 from Chitradurga to Hiriyur, at about 8.00 a.m. and when he came near Anesidri gate, on N.H.4, Hiriyur Taluk, at that time, the driver of lorry bearing registration No.KA-05-AE-5164 which was moving in front of the said Ashoka Leyland vehicle, all of a sudden, took his lorry rashly and negligently towards right side of the road, resulting in back portion of the said lorry dashing to Ashoka Leyland vehicle, as a result of which, Harish sustained multiple injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. Hence, the claimants filed a claim petition under section 166 of M.V. Act on the ground that claimant No.1 is the wife, claimant No.2 being minor daughter of deceased Harish (in MFA No.1902/2022) and respondent Nos.4 and 5 therein being the parents of deceased Harish (claimant No.1 is father and claimant No.2-mother(in MFA No.1716/2022) on account of death of Harish sought for enhancement of compensation. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 4. Learned counsel for the claimants contended that the Tribunal committed an error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- p.m., which is on the lower side, inasmuch as, deceased was a truck driver and earning a sum of Rs.20,000/- p.m. Thus, he sought to allow the appeal. 5. Per-contra, learned counsel for Insurance company contended that the driver of the lorry was not possessing valid driving licence to drive the vehicle as on the date of the accident and therefore, the Insurance company is not liable to pay any compensation. Learned counsel further contended that the Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation under each heads. The accident was due to negligent driving of the lorry and there is contributory negligence by the truck driver. Thus, he prays for dismissal of the appeal filed by the claimants and to allow the appeal filed by the Insurance company. 6. Having heard learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the appeal papers including the original records of the Tribunal, the following points that would arise for our consideration in these appeals are as under:- 1. Whether the Insurance Company has made out sufficient grounds for contributing negligence on the part of deceased and hence, the Tribunal is not - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 right in saddling entire liability on the Insurer of the vehicle? 2. Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement? 7. We have perused the contentions raised by learned counsel for Insurance company. 8. Insofar as contributory negligence is concerned, from the perusal of the evidence of PW.1 and the contents of the charge sheet, it appears that the driver of the lorry bearing registration No.KA-05-AE-5164 was driving the lorry as on the date of the accident. It is the contention of the Insurance company that the driver of the lorry was not possessing valid and effective driving licence. In order to substantiate this contention, the Insurance company has not at all produced any documents and also not let any evidence on their behalf. Therefore, the contention of the Insurance company remained as contention without any proof. From perusal of Ex-P7-charge sheet, it clearly demonstrates that there is no utterances of lorry driver not possessing driving licence and the Investigating Officer has not filed charge sheet under Section 3 of M.V. Act. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly held that respondent No.2 failed to prove that the driver of the lorry bearing registration - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 No.KA-05-AE-5164 was not having valid and effective driving licence and there is also condition violation and the company is not liable to pay any compensation. Therefore, the tribunal has rightly answered issue No.2 in the negative in that regard. 9. Insofar as quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- p.m., which is on meager side. The accident is of the year 2018. Documentary evidence is not placed on record with regard to income of the deceased. In the absence of any proof of income, taking note of the circular issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority as well as High Court Legal Services Committee, Bengaluru, we deem it appropriate to re-assess the notional income of the deceased at Rs.12,500/- p.m. Thus, the 'loss of dependency' works out to Rs.26,77,500/-(12,500/- x1/4th+40%x12x17) and it is awarded against Rs.21,42,000/- by the tribunal. 10. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Ltd., vs. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and others1, in MFA No.1902/2022, claimant No1. being the wife, she is entitled to spousal consortium of Rs.48,000/-(Rs.40,000+20% escalation), claimant No.2 being the minor daughter, she is entitled to parental consortium of Rs.48,000/- 1 (2018) 18 SCC 130 - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 (Rs.40,000+20%) and in MFA No.1716/2021, claimants Nos.1 and 2 being the parents of deceased Harish, they are entitled to filial consortium of Rs.96,000(Rs.40,000x 2+20%), which totally works out to Rs.1,92,000/- towards 'loss of consortium'. In addition, the claimants are entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards 'funeral expenses' with 20% escalation which comes to Rs.18,000/- and towards 'loss of estate' Rs.15,000/-(Rs.15,000 +20%) which comes to Rs.18,000/-. Thus, the claimants-appellants are entitled for a total compensation, as per the table below: Compensation under different Heads Amount awarded by Tribunal in Rs. Amount awarded by this Court Loss of income(loss of dependency 21,42,000/- 26,77,500/- Loss of filial consortium 1,60,000/- 1,92,000/- Loss of estate 60,000/- 18,000/- Funeral expenses 15,000/- 18,000/- TOTAL Compensation awarded by the Tribunal 23,77,000/- 29,05,500/- BALANCE 5,28,500/- 11. The claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.29,05,500/- as against Rs.23,77,000/- awarded by the tribunal. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 Accordingly, we pass the following: ORDER 1. MFA No.1461/2021 filed by the appellant-Insurance company is dismissed. 2. MFA No.1902/2022 and MFA No.1716/2022 filed by the claimants are allowed-in-part. 3. The judgment and award dated 15.12.2020 passed by learned Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Challakere in MVC No.237/2019 is modified to the extent stated hereinabove. 4. The claimants are entitled for an additional enhanced compensation of Rs.5,28,500/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of its realization. 5. The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation with interest at 6% p.a. within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. 6. The amount in deposit by the Insurance company before this Court shall be transmitted to the tribunal within a week. 7. Draw the modified award accordingly. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:30379-DB MFA No. 1902 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 1461 of 2021 MFA No. 1716 of 2022 8. Registry to transmit a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal, along with its records. 9. No order as to costs. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE MN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38