- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH 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.5398 OF 2015 (MV-D) CONNECTED WITH MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4234 OF 2015 (MV-D) IN M.F.A. No.5398/2015: BETWEEN: 1. NARAYANAMMA S. AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS W/O SRI SANKE CHENNAIAH. 2. SANKE CHENNAIAH AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS SINCE DEAD, REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE: 2(A) SHANKAR NARAYANA SANKE S/O. LATE SANKE CHENNAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS. APPELLANT NOS.1 AND 2(A) ARE RESIDENT OF 5TH CROSS KAVERI STREET, UDAY NAGAR BENGALURU-560 016. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI CHETAN KUMAR H., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 AND: 1. NIRMALA SANKE AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS W/O. LATE DEVA KUMAR SANKE. 2. AKSHARA SANKE AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, SMT. NIRAMALA SANKE. BOTH RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2 ARE RESIDING AT NO.S-4, AMRUTHA VILLA LBS NAGAR MAIN ROAD ANNASANDRA PALYA, NEAR RAMA TEMPLE BENGALURU-560 017. 3. M/S. SLV TRAVELS G. MANJUNATHA S/O GOVINDAPPA MAJOR IN AGE RESIDING AT NO.829, 2ND DIVISION ATTIBELE CIRLCE BENGALURU-560 107. 4. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT RELIANCE CENTRE 19 WALCHAND HIRACHAND MARG BALLARD ESTATE MUMBAI-400 001. AND BRANCH OFFICE AT NO.4/3-1 AND 3/2, 11TH MAIN, JAYANAGAR III BLOCK BENGALURU-560 061 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MOHAN S. REDDY, ALONG WITH SRI SATHISHA T.K., ADVOCATES, FOR R-1 AND R-2, SRI PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE, FOR R-4, & VIDE ORDER DATED 29.1.2021, NOTICE TO R-3 IS DISPENSED WITH) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 IN M.F.A. NO.4234/2015: BETWEEN: 1. SMT. NIRMALA SANKE W/O. DEVA KUMAR SANKE AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS. 2. BABY AKSHARA SANKE D/O. LATE DEVA KUAMAR SANKE AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS SINCE MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HER MTOHER, SMT. NIRMALA SANKE. BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.S-4, AMRUTHA VILLA LBS NAGAR MAIN ROAD ANNASANDRA PALYA NEAR RAMA TEMPLE BENGALURU-560 017. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI MOHAN S. REDDY, ALONG WITH SRI SATHISHA T.K., ADVOCATES) AND: 1. M/S. SLV TRAVELS REPRESENTED BY SRI G. MANJUNATH S/O. GOVINDAPPA RESIDING AT NO.829 2ND DIVISION, ATTIBELE CIRCLE BENGALURU-560 107. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE BRANCH OFFICE AT NO.4/3/-1 AND 3/2M 11TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK JAYANAGAR BENGALURU-560 061. 3. NARAYANAMMA S. W/O. SANKE CHENNAIAH AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 4. SANKE CHENNAIAH S/O KONDAIAH AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS SINCE DECEASED, REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE: 4(A) SHANKAR NARAYANA SANKE S/O. LATE SANKE CHANNAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS. RESPONDENT NOS.3 AND 4(A) ARE RESIDENT OF NO.205, 5TH CROSS KAVERI STREET, UDAYNAGAR BENGALURU-560 016. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE, FOR R-2, SRI CHETHAN KUMAR H., ADVOCATE, FOR R-3 AND R-4(A), & R-1 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) * * * THESE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS ARE FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V. ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.2.2015 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.4704 OF 2011 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU, 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 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T) Miscellaneous First Appeal No.5398 of 2015 is filed by the parents and Miscellaneous First Appeal No.4234 of 2015 is filed by the wife and daughter of Sri Deva Kumar Sanke (hereinafter referred to as 'deceased') challenging the judgment and award dated 18-2-2015 passed in M.V.C. No.4704 of 2011 on the file of the Court of Small Causes and Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru, whereby, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.22,50,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realisation. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are that on 20-5-2011, when Sri Deva Kumar Sanke was riding the motorcycle, bearing Registration No.KA-03 HE-5931, near Beretena Agrahara, Hosur Road, the driver of a bus, bearing Registration No.KA-51 4806, drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased, as a result, the deceased died on the spot. Hence, the claimants filed a claim - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the Tribunal seeking compensation. 4. Heard Sri Chetan Kumar H., learned counsel for the appellants/claimants in Miscellaneous First Appeal No.5398 of 2015, Sri Mohan S. Reddy along with Sri Sathisha T.K., learned counsel for the appellants/claimants in Miscellaneous First Appeal No.4234 of 2015, and Sri Pradeep B., learned counsel for the respondent/Insurance Company. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants have strenuously contended that the deceased was working as a Software Engineer in Tech Mahindra Private Limited and earning Rs.1,09,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has considered the notional income at Rs.10,000/- per month, which is on lower side. Hence, they prayed for enhancement of the compensation. 6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent- Insurance Company, supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded just and reasonable compensation under each head, which does not - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 call for interference at the hands of this Court. Thus, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the appeal papers along with I.A. No.1 of 2025 including original records of the Tribunal, the following points would arise for our consideration in these appeals: i. Whether the appellants have assigned valid reasons to consider I.A. No.1 of 2025 filed under Order XXXXI, Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for production of documents? ii. Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement? 8. In the case on hand, the respondent-Insurance Company has not disputed the accident and death of the deceased, but denied its liability on the ground that the offending vehicle was not having 'Fitness Certificate' as on the date of the accident. 9. The Tribunal has saddled the liability on the owner of the offending vehicle. The Insurance Company has admitted - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 that the offending vehicle was insured with them and the Insurance Policy was in force as on the date of the accident. However, the Insurance Company denied its liability on the ground that the offending vehicle was not having 'Fitness Certificate' as on the date of the accident and therefore, it amounts to violation of the policy conditions. 10. The accident took place on 20-5-2011 i.e. before the amendment was brought under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in the year 2022. The relevant law at that time was that, even if there are issues with the Insurance Policy or vehicle owner's actions, the Insurance Company would be directed to pay the compensation, however, with liberty to recover it from the vehicle owner, or the insured party, under certain circumstances. 11. In so far as quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal has considered the notional income of the deceased at Rs.10,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the claimants relied on Ex.P10-Letter issued by the employer-Tech Mahindra Private Limited. As per Ex.P8-offer letter and Ex.P9- salary slip, the petitioner was working as a Software Engineer - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 in the said Company and was earning Rs.1,09,000/-. However, the claimants have not examined the employer of the deceased. In Miscellaneous First Appeal No.4234 of 2015, the appellants have filed I.A. No.1 of 2025 for production of documents, i.e. PAN card, and Income Tax returns from 2004- 05 to 2010-11. In view of the supporting documents submitted by the appellants, I.A. No.1 of 2025 is considered. As per Income Tax returns for the financial year 2009-10, the gross total income of the deceased is Rs.3,78,374/- and tax paid is Rs.12,117/-. Hence, the income of the deceased is taken at Rs.3,66,257/- (3,78,374 minus 12,117) and the same is rounded off to Rs.3,70,000/-. 12. As per the dictum of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, 40% of the income must be added towards future prospects, which comes to Rs.1,48,000/- (3,70,000 X 40%) and the total income comes to Rs.5,18,000 (3,70,000 + 1,48,000). The deceased has got four dependants. Hence, 1/4th shall be deducted towards his personal and living expenses and 3/4 has to be considered for determining the compensation. 3/4 of - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 Rs.5,18,000/- would be Rs.3,88,500/-. The deceased was aged 32 years as on the date of the accident. Hence, the applicable multiplier would be ‘16’. Thus, 'loss of dependency' is reckoned as 62,16,000/- (3,88,500 x 16) as against Rs.21,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 13. In the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and Others reported in (2018) 18 SCC 130, the Hon’ble Apex Court by referring to the decision of the Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi's case, stated supra, has discussed about granting the compensation under the head of ‘loss of consortium’ and has also issued guidelines for grant of ‘spousal consortium’, ‘parental consortium’ and ‘filial consortium’. The claimants are father, mother, wife and children of the deceased. In view of the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesaid decision, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- (Rs.40,000/- each) towards ‘loss of consortium’ as against Rs.25,000/- and Rs.20,000/- towards 'loss of love and affection' awarded by the Tribunal. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 14. Further, Rs.15,000/- towards 'funeral expenses' as against Rs.25,000/- and Rs.15,000/- towards 'loss of estate' as against Rs.20,000/- are awarded. 15. Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following compensation: HEADS Rs. Loss of dependency 62,16,000.00 Funeral expenses 15,000.00 Loss of consortium 1,20,000.00 Loss of estate 15,000.00 TOTAL 63,66,000.00 Less: Compensation awarded by the Tribunal 22,50,000.00 ENHANCED COMPENSATION 41,16,000.00 16. In the result, we pass the following: O R D E R i. The appeals are allowed-in-part. ii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated hereinabove. The claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.63,66,000/- as against Rs.22,50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation of Rs.41,16,000/- from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of its realisation. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:31684-DB MFA No. 5398 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4234 of 2015 iii. The respondent-Reliance General Insurance Company Limited is directed to deposit the total compensation together with interest within a period of six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, and recover it later from the owner of the offending vehicle. iv. Apportionment, disbursement and deposit of the enhanced compensation shall be made in terms of the award of the Tribunal. v. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. vi. Draw a modified award accordingly. vii. No order as to costs. Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment to the Tribunal along with its record, forthwith. Sd/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE Sd/- (VENKATESH NAIK T) JUDGE KVK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20