- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9472 OF 2017 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4987 OF 2017 (MV-D) IN MFA No. 9472/2017 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RENUKA W/O LATE DASAPPA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 2. CHETAN @ RANGANATH S/O LATE DASAPPA AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS 3. KARIYAMMA W/O LATE HANUMANNA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS THE SECOND APPELLANT IS MINOR AND HENCE HE IS REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN THE FIRST APPELLANT VIZ SMT RENUKA ALL ARE R/O MAGODU VILLAGE GOLARAHATTI, SIRA TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572137 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K V SHYAMAPRASADA.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD., Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 REP BY ITS MANAGER NO.41, 2ND FLOOR VISHNU COMPELX LAVELLE ROAD, BANGALORE-560001 2. RAVISH N P S/O N V PUTTALAKSHMAIAH MAJOR MUDALAPANNE HULIKUNTE HOBLI KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-572129 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOKA H, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R1 NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD 08.07.2022) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.04.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.1533/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDITIONAL MACT, JMFC, SIRA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC. IN MFA NO. 4987/2017 BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER IFFCO TOKIO GIC LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, NO.41, 2ND FLOOR VISHNU COMPLEX LAVELLE ROAD, BANGALORE-560001 NOW REP BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER IFFCO TOKIO GIC LTD CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTER SRI SHANTHI TOWERS, 5TH FLOOR NO.141, 3RD MAIN, EAST OF NGEF LAYOUT KASTURI NAGAR BANGALORE-560043 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. ASHOKA H, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRADEEP B, ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 AND: 1. RENUKA W/O LATE DASAPPA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 2. CHETAN @ RANGANATH S/O LATE DASAPPA AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS MINOR REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER NATURAL GUARDIAN RESPONDENT NO.1 3. KARIYAMMA W/O LATE HANUMANNA NOW AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS ALL ARE R/O MAGODU VILLAGE GOLARAHATTI, SIRA TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 577501. 4. RAVISH N P S/O N V PUTTALAKSHMAIAH R/O MUDALAPANNE, HULIKUNTE HOBLI KORATAGERE TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT-577501 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.D S SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3 R4 IS SERVED AND UNPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.04.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.1533/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, & ADDITIONAL MACT, SIRA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.9,44,056/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT AND ETC. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FURTHER SUBMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT Both the above appeals are filed challenging the judgment and award and award dated 07.04.2017 passed in MVC No.1533/2014 by the Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT., Sira1. The Tribunal by its judgment and award dated 07.04.2017 partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a total compensation of `9,44,056/- together with interest 9% per annum. Being aggrieved, the claimants have preferred MFA No.9472/2017 and the insurer has preferred MFA No.4987/2017. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred as per their rank before the Tribunal. 3. It is the contention of the learned counsel Sri B. Pradeep, appearing for the insurer that the insured vehicle did not have the requisite permit and that the insured vehicle, at the time of the accident was used in violation of the terms and conditions of the policy of insurance. Hence he contends that the judgment of the Tribunal fastening the liability to pay the compensation awarded on the insurer is erroneous and liable to 1 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’ - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 be interfered with. It is also contended that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and the rate of interest is excessive. 4. Per Contra, learned counsel Sri K.V. Shyamaprasada appearing for the claimants submits that the insurer has not proved its contention that there was a breach of policy condition and that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side which is required to be enhanced. 5. The submissions of both the learned counsels have been considered and the material on record including the records of the Tribunal, have been perused. The questions that arise for consideration are: i) Whether the finding of the Tribunal fastening the liability to pay the compensation awarded on the insurer is liable to be interfered with? ii) Whether the quantum of compensation is required to be enhanced? Re: Question No.(i): 6. It is the case of the claimant before the claims Tribunal that when the deceased was proceeding on his motorcycle, a - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 bus came from the backside in a rash and negligent manner and hit his vehicle, causing the accident. The owner of the vehicle who was arrayed as respondent No. 2 before the Tribunal remained ex-parte and did not contest the proceedings. The insurer of the vehicle has contested the claim proceedings and statement of objections was filed. 7. The representative of the insurer was examined as RW1, wherein he specifically deposed that the insured bus was being plied on the Sira-Madhugiri road in violation of the route permit and beyond the permitted route. It is further deposed that route permit No.PST.S.No.126/98-99 has been issued to the insured vehicle. It is the forthcoming from the records of the Tribunal that in the claim proceedings, the claimant filed I.A. No.3 to summon the witness from the RTO Office and the Tribunal vide order dated 29.07.2016 had issued notice to the said witness. Thereafter, since the witness was not present before Tribunal, vide order dated 16.12.2016 a bailable warrant was issued. Despite the same, the witness not having turned up, the Tribunal proceeded with the adjudication of the matter and recorded a finding that the insurer has not proved the breach of the terms of conditions of the policy of insurance. It - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 is further forthcoming from the records of the Tribunal that a copy of the permit of the insured bus has been produced, wherein it discloses that the insured bus was permitted to be operated on the route from Madhugiri to Tumakuru. 8. It is forthcoming from the material on record that the insurer has taken a specific defence with regard to the insured vehicle not having a valid route permit and every attempt was made by the insurer to prove the same. The material on record also discloses that the permit was for a different route and that the insured vehicle was being plied on the date of accident in violation of the said permit. Having regard to the said factual matrix and keeping in mind the legal proposition as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Asha Rani and Others2, the finding of the Tribunal holding the insurer liability is required to be interfered with and it is required to be held that the insurer is required to pay the compensation to the claimants as determined, with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. 2 AIR 2003 SC 607 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 Accordingly, question No.(i) is answered as partly in the affirmative. Re: question No.(ii): 9. The deceased was aged 42 years as on date of the accident. The Tribunal has applied the appropriate multiplier of 14 which is just and proper. 10. It is averred in the claim petition that the deceased was working as a Mason and Agriculturist and earning ` 15,000/- per month. However, no documents are produced to prove his income. The Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at `7,000/- per month. Having regard to the date of the accident, it is just and proper that the notional income of the deceased be re-assessed as `8,500/- per month. 11. 25% is required to be added towards future prospects having regard to the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors.3 and 1/3rd of his income is to be deducted towards personal expenses since the dependants are three in number. In view of the same, the compensation towards loss of dependency in re-assessed as (`8,500 +25% -1/3rd x 12 x 3 AIR 2017 SC 5157 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 14) `11,90,000/- as against `7,84,056/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12. As per the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi2 and Magma General Insurance Company Ltd. V. Nanu Ram4, claimants who are three in number are entitled to compensation of `40,000/- each, on the head of loss of consortium with escalation at 20% and accordingly a sum of (`48,000/- x 3) `1,44,000/- is awarded towards the same. 13. The compensation towards loss of estate and funeral expenses is also required to be awarded at ₹15,000/- each together with escalation at 20%. Accordingly, the compensation towards the same is re-assessed as ₹18,000/- each. 14. In view of the compensation having been awarded on conventional heads as above, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards funeral expenses, love and affection, loss of consortium and loss of estate stand suitably modified/set aside. 4 (2018) 18 SCC 130 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 15. It is noticed that the Tribunal has awarded interest at 9% per annum. However, taking judicial notice of the interest payable towards fixed deposits, it is just and proper to award interest at the rate of 7% p.a. Hence, question No.(ii) is answered in the affirmative. 16. In view of the aforementioned, the compensation is re- assessed as follows: Sl.No Compensation Head Amount Awarded by the Tribunal (`) Amount awarded by this Court (`) 1 Loss of dependency 7,84,056.00 11,90,000.00 2 Love and filial affection 1,00,000.00 00 3 Funeral Expenses & transportation 10,000.00 18,000.00 4 Consortium 50,000.00 1,44,000.00 5 Loss of estate 00 18,000.00 Total 9,44,056.00 13,69,944.00 17. Accordingly, the claimants are entitled to an enhanced compensation of (`13,69,944/- - `9,44,056/-) `4,25,888/-. 18. In view of the aforementioned, the following: - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 ORDER i) Both the appeals are partly allowed; ii) The judgment and award dated 07.04.2017 passed in MVC No.1533/2014 by the Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT., Sira is modified holding that the claimants are entitled to a total compensation of `13,69,944.00/- together with interest @ 7% per annum from date of petition till date of payment; iii) The amount deposited by the appellant/insurer in MFA No.4987/2017 together with records be transmitted to the Tribunal; iv)The insurer (appellant in MFA No.4987/2017 / respondent No.1 before the Tribunal) shall deposit the balance compensation together with accrued interest within six weeks and with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle who is the respondent No.2 before the Tribunal; v) The disbursement of the compensation shall be in terms of the judgment and award of the Tribunal; - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25171 MFA No. 9472 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 4987 of 2017 vi) The Registry to draw the modified award accordingly; No costs. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE BS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 26