- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5280 OF 2025 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1913 OF 2021 (MV-D) IN MFA NO. 5280/2025: BETWEEN: 1. SRI SHIRAZ S/O SHAIK AHMED, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, 2. SMT. ANJUM ISHRAT, W/O SHIRAZ, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 3. SHABEENAZ, D/O SHIRAZ @ SHIRAZ AHMED, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS 4. NEHA S, D/O SHIRAZ @ SHIRAZ AHMED AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.32, THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD, SARIYAPALYA, BEHIND SANDYA SCHOOL, DR. SHIVARMKARANTHNAGAR, BENGALURU-560 077. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. P. MAHADEVA SWAMY., ADVOCATE) 0 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 AND: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 027 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. G. LAKSHMEESH RAO, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.12.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.1419/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL `CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU CITY, (SCCH-4), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA No. 1913/2021: BETWEEN: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 027. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. G. LAKSHMEESH RAO., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. SHIRAZ S/O SHAIK AHMED AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, 2. SMT. ANJUM ISHRAT S/O SHIRAZ AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, SHABEENAZ 3. D/O SHIRAZ @ SHIRAZ AHMED AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 4. NEHA S D/O SHIRAZ @ SHIRAZ AHMED - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT NO.32, THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD, SARIYAPALYA BEHIND SANDYA SCHOOL DR. SHIVARAMKARANTH NAGAR BENGALURU - 560 077. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. P MAHADEVA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.12.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.1419/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU SCCH-4, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.17,02,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU) These cross appeals while, M.F.A.No.5280/2025 has been filed by the legal representatives of the deceased Imran S. under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short) and M.F.A.No.1913/2021 has been filed by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation(hereinafter referred to as the “KSRTC”). Both appeals seek to challenge the Judgment and Award Dated - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 16.12.2020 in MVC No.1419/2019 passed by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru City [hereinafter referred as “the Impugned Judgment”]. By the Impugned Judgment, the learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.17,02,000/- to the claimants with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till its realisation and has fixed the contributory negligence both on the KSRTC and claimants in the ratio of 60% and 40% respectively. The appellants/claimants in MFA No.5280/2025 seek to set aside the finding on contributory negligence and also to enhance the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal. While the respondent/KSRTC in MFA No.1913/2021 seeks to challenge the contributory negligence as well as reduction in the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The facts giving rise to the filing of these appeals are, that on 05.11.2017, one Imran.S was riding the motor cycle along with his friend Ravi Shankarachari as the pillion rider. While he was travelling on Old Madras Road, K.R.Puram Flyover Bridge near ITI Colony Gate, Bangalore, a KSRTC bus bearing registration No.KA-40-F-0910 was alleged as driven in a rash and negligent manner and without any signal and indication stopped the bus on the centre of the road which - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 resulted in a loss of control over the motor cycle by Imran and a collision of the motor cycle with the rear end of the bus. As a result of the aforesaid accident, both persons on the motor cycle sustained grievous injuries. Imran S. succumbed to his injuries on the way to hospital. The dependents/legal representatives of the deceased Imran filed a claim petition in MVC No.1419/2019 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation. In the claim petition filed by the legal representatives of the deceased Imran, it was further stated that the deceased Imran was aged about 23 years at the time of accident and was working as a Mobile Technician and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. It was further stated that the accident took place solely on account of negligence on the part of the driver of the KSRTC bus. The claimants claimed the compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- along with interest. It was contended that the respondent/KSRTC as the owner and insurer of the offending vehicle was liable to pay the entire compensation. The respondent/KSRTC, on the other hand contended that the vehicle was driven by its driver slowly and cautiously by the left side of the road by observing traffic rules and regulations, and it was while the bus was proceeding at K.R.Puram Flyover, the motor cycle was being - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 driven by the deceased Imran in a rash and negligent manner and came from behind and caused the accident. It was further contended that the respondent/KSRTC was falsely implicated by the police with the active connivance of the appellants/claimants. Thus, it was contended that respondent/KSRTC is not liable to make payment of compensation. 7. On the basis of the pleadings, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues: 1. Whether the petitioners prove that deceased Sri.Imran.S. was died in RTA arising out of accident alleged to have been taken place on 05.11.2017 at about 7.30 p.m., Old Madras road, K.R.Puram Fly Over bridge, Near ITI Colony Gate, Bengaluru, due to the rash and negligence driving of driver of the KSRTC Bus bearing registration No.KA-40-F-910? 2. Whether the petitioners prove that they are dependents of the deceased? 3. Whether the petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, what amount and from whom? 4. What Order or Award? The learned Tribunal has passed the Impugned Judgment by clubbing both MVC No.5306/2018 and MVC No.1419/2019 together by recording common evidence. The appellant No.3/claimant No.3 was examined as P.W.4. The learned - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 Tribunal after examining the evidence including the police complaint and records as well as the sketch and mahazar found that the accident took place on the flyover on the down gradient road and that the bus driver was not diligent and had applied the brakes suddenly, leading to the accident. In addition, reliance was also placed on the police record to give a finding that the motor cycle being ridden by the deceased in a rash, negligent and zigzag manner. It was thus held that a major part of negligence is of the driver of the bus while some part of the negligence was also on the rider of the motor cycle. The learned Tribunal thus affixed the negligence at 60% on the driver of the bus while 40% on the rider of the motor cycle. The learned Tribunal after calculating the compensation on various statutory heads awarded the compensation in the following manner: Sl.No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) 01. Loss of dependency 15,12,000/- 02. Loss of consortium 1,60,000/- 03. Towards transportation of dead body and funeral expenses 15,000/- 04. Loss of estate 15,000/- TOTAL 17,02,000/- - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 10. As stated above, the appellants/claimants have filed MFA No.5280/2025 seeking enhancement of compensation and also challenged the contributory negligence saddled on the rider of the motor cycle, while the respondent/KSRTC has filed MFA No.1913/2021 challenging the contributory negligence and quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal. 10. This Court by its order dated 20.04.2021 had directed stay of the award subject to the respondent/KSRTC depositing 50% of the awarded amount before the learned Tribunal. Learned counsel for the parties contended that the said amount was since deposited in compliance with the order passed by this Court. 11. The learned counsel for the appellants/claimants contended that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, however, his monthly income has been wrongly assessed at Rs.10,000/- and the learned Tribunal also erred in fixing the contributory negligence of 40% on the part of the deceased. It was contended that the award of compensation towards loss of consortium and conventional heads is on the lower side. 12. Learned Counsel for the respondent/KSRTC, on the other hand contended has that the rough sketch and IMV report does not support - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 the findings of the learned Tribunal and that the driver of the KSRTC who has deposed as R.W.1 did not stop the vehicle and was moving slowly. Thus, it was contended that the finding of contributory negligence is incorrect. 13. The record reflects that the learned Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month and added future prospects at 40% and calculated the multiplier at ‘18’ and since the deceased was a bachelor, deducted 50% towards personal expenses and calculated the loss of dependency as follows: Rs.10,000/- +40% future prospects= Rs.14,000/- Rs.14,000/- x ½ = Rs. 7,000/- Rs.7,000x12x18 = Rs.15,12,000/- 15. Although learned counsel for the appellant/claimants has contended that the deceased was earning a salary of Rs.20,000/- per month, they have been unable to show any evidence in support thereof. No salary slip or evidence in support of the contention that the deceased was earning Rs.20,000/- per month has been placed on record. The accident is of the year 2017. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants has been unable to make any submission to controvert this assessment. 16. In the absence of any proof of income, taking note of the Circular - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority as well as the High Court Legal Services Committee, Bengaluru, we deem it appropriate to take the notional income of the deceased at Rs.11,000/- per month. So far as concerns the non-pecuniary heads, the amounts awarded are adequate. 17. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is re-assessed as follows: Sl.No. Particulars Amount(Rs.) 01. Loss of dependency [Rs.11,000+40%= Rs.15,400/-x 1/2= Rs.7,700/-] Rs.7,700x12x18 16,63,200/- 02. Loss of consortium 1,60,000/- 03. Transportation of dead body and funeral expenses 15,000/- 04. Loss of estate 15,000/- TOTAL 18,53,200/- 18. On the aspect of liability, the learned Tribunal has assessed the contributory negligence on behalf of the deceased at the rate of 40%. The finding in this behalf has been made by the learned Tribunal based on the fact the rider of the motor cycle/deceased was not holding a valid insurance at that point of time. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 19. Learned Counsel for the respondent/KSRTC has taken us through the spot mahazar of the accident as well as the police report, which sets out that the motor cycle was being driven by the deceased in a zigzag manner. In addition, it is set out that although there was a 30x40 ft. distance between the vehicles and 8 ft. on the left side which gave enough room for moving, the deceased had still managed to collide with the bus. In these circumstances, it is apposite to set out assessment of contributory negligence at the rate of 50% each on the respondent/KSRTC as well as the deceased. 20. Accordingly, the respondent/KSRTC is liable to pay revised compensation amount of Rs.18,53,200/- [Rs.18,53,200 X 50% = Rs.9,26,600/-] to the appellants/claimants. The Court proceeds to pass the following directions: ORDER (i) The impugned Judgment and Award dated 16.12.2020 in MVC No.1419/2018 passed by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru City, SCCH-4, is modified to the extent that the appellants/claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.18,53,200/- along with - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. (ii) The award on contributory negligence is modified to an extent of 50% on the deceased and 50% on respondent/KSRTC. Accordingly, respondent/KSRTC is directed to deposit Rs.9,26,600/- [Rs.18,53,000 X 50% = Rs.9,26,600/-] with interest at 6% p.a. within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the judgment. (iii) The remaining portion of the Impugned Award of the Tribunal remains undisturbed. (iv) The amount which has been deposited by the respondent/KSRTC before the learned Tribunal shall be deducted prior to making the payment to the appellants/claimants. (v) The Registry is directed to draw the modified Award accordingly. (vi) Registry is directed transmit a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal, along with its records. (vii) The appeals are disposed off in the aforegoing - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44067-DB MFA No. 5280 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 1913 of 2021 term. All pending applications stand closed. (viii) No order as to costs. (D K SINGH) JUDGE (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE Yn. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16 Digitally signed by DINESH KUMAR SINGH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA