- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33637-DB MFA No. 3256 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH 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. 3256 OF 2019 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT SHARAVATHI W/O LATE THEERTHAMALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, 2. KAVYASHREE D/O LATE THEERTHAMALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 3. VINAY S/O LATE THEERTHAMALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT SEEGE VILLAGE, SALAGAME HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK & DISTRICT-573201 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. H J ANANDA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SALEELKUMAR PADYA S/O GANESHWARA PADYA, MAJOR, R/AT NO.6, 4TH CROSS, AYAPPA LAYOUT, K.R.GARDEN, MARATHAHALLY, BANGALORE-560037 Digitally signed by VASANTHA KUMARY B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33637-DB MFA No. 3256 of 2019 2. THE MANAGER ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., THE ESTATE BUILDING, 9TH FLOOR, DICKENSON ROAD, BANGALORE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B.C.SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; VIDE ORDER DATED:03.01.2022, NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 24.11.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1166/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE MACT, HASSAN, 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: 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) 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The appellants - claimants have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the II Additional Senior - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33637-DB MFA No. 3256 of 2019 Civil Judge and MACT, Hassan in MVC.No.1166/2017 dated 24.11.2018. 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, appellant No.1 is the wife and appellant Nos.2 and 3 are the children of the deceased Theerthamallappa. On 07.05.2017 at around 5.30 pm, when the husband of the first appellant was coming in his T.V.S.Vigo motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA- 05-HP-0043 on Hassan-Halebeedu road near Seege border near High School, at that point of time the driver of the Honda Accent car bearing Reg.No.KA-04-Z-7231 came in rash and negligent manner with endanger to human life from the back side and dashed against the bike belonging to the deceased Theerthamallappa and due to the impact, he fell down from the bike and sustained injuries to his head, ear, eyes and other parts of the body. Immediately after the accident, he was shifted to the Government - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33637-DB MFA No. 3256 of 2019 Hospital at Hassan and thereafter, as per the advise of doctors, he was shifted to the NIMHANS Hospital at Bangalore and from there he was shifted and admitted as inpatient in the Apollo Hospital at Bangalore. However, due to the grievous injuries sustained in the accident, the husband of the first appellant succumbed to death on 08.05.2017. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that, the Tribunal has committed an error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- per month which is on lower side inasmuch as the deceased was doing agricultural work, milk vending and also involved in the political activities and from all he was earning a sum of Rs.50,000/- per month. 6. Secondly, the Tribunal has failed to award a fair compensation under the head 'loss of consortium' for which the claimants would be entitled to at Rs.40,000/- each. Thus, he prays to allow the appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33637-DB MFA No. 3256 of 2019 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that, on considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal has granted just and reasonable compensation under each head which does not call for any interference of the hands of this Court. Hence, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 8. Having heard learned counsels for the appellants and respondents, the point that would arise for our consideration in the appeal is: Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement? 9. In the instant appeal, the respondent - Insurance Company has not disputed the accident in question, the cause of death of the deceased and the liability to pay compensation to the claimants. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33637-DB MFA No. 3256 of 2019 10. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is considered, the Tribunal has considered the income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- per month which is on meager side. The accident is of the year 2017 and no documentary evidence is recorded based on income of the deceased in that regard. In the absence of any proof of income, taking note of the Circular issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and the High Court Legal Services Committee, Bengaluru, we deem it appropriate to reassess the income of the deceased at Rs.11,000/- per month. 11. The deceased was aged about 60 years at the time of accident. The respondent - Insurance Company has not disputed this aspect. Hence, the appropriate multiplier applicable for the age group of the deceased is '9'. 12. The deceased died leaving behind his wife and two children. Hence, it is appropriate to deduct 1/3rd towards her personal expenses. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33637-DB MFA No. 3256 of 2019 13. The Tribunal has not considered the future prospects of the deceased. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Vs. PRANAY SETHI reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 has held that, if the deceased is within the age group of 50 - 60 years, then 10% of the income of the deceased would be added as future prospects. Hence, the loss of dependency is reckoned as under: Rs.11,000 + 10% = Rs.12,100/- Rs.12,100 - Rs.4033 (1/3rd) = Rs.8,067/- Rs.8,067 x 12 x 9 = Rs.8,71,236. 14. The Tribunal has committed an error in not awarding fair compensation under conventional heads. In view of the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED VS. NANU RAM ALIAS CHUHRURAM AND OTHERS reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130 and NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED VS. PRANAY SETHI AND - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33637-DB MFA No. 3256 of 2019 OTHERS reported in 2017(16) SCC 680, the claimants are entitled towards ‘loss of consortium’ at Rs.40,000/- each which comes to the total of Rs.1,20,000/-, Rs.15,000/- towards ‘loss of estate’ and Rs.15,000/- for ‘funeral expenses’. 15. Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following compensation: HEADS Rs. Loss of dependency 8,71,236.00 Loss of consortium 1,20,000.00 Funeral expenses 15,000.00 Loss of estate 15,000.00 TOTAL 10,21,236.00 Less: Compensation awarded by the Tribunal 7,82,800.00 ENHANCED COMPENSATION 2,38,436.00 16. In the result, we pass the following: O R D E R i. The appeal is allowed-in-part. ii. The judgment and award dated 24.11.2018 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33637-DB MFA No. 3256 of 2019 Hassan in MVC.No.1166/2017 is modified to the extent stated hereinabove. The claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.10,21,236/- as against Rs.7,82,800/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation of Rs.2,38,436/- from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of its realization. iii. Respondent - Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount together with interest within eight 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. Draw modified award accordingly. vi. No order as to costs. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:33637-DB MFA No. 3256 of 2019 Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the Tribunal along with its record, forthwith. In view of the disposal of the appeal, all pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed off, as they do not survive for any consideration. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE DHA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15