- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37693 MFA No. 3262 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3262 OF 2020 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. NASEEMA BHANU W/O ASIF ALI AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS RESIDING AT BASAVANAGUDI BEEDHI PETE HOLENARASIPURA TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT 2. KANEEZ JAHIR D/O ASIF ALI AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS RESIDING AT BASAVANAGUDI BEEDHI PETE HOLENARASIPURA TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT 3. KAREEM ALI S/O ASIF ALI AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS MINOR BEING REPTD BY MOTHER 1ST PETITIONER RESIDING AT BASAVANAGUDI BEEDHI PETE HOLENARASIPURA TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT 4. ANEEZ JAHIR S/O ASIF ALI AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37693 MFA No. 3262 of 2020 MINOR BEING REPTD BY MOTHER 1ST PETITIONER RESIDING AT BASAVANAGUDI BEEDHI PETE HOLENARASIPURA TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT 5. JAKEETH ABBAS D/O ASIF ALI AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS MINOR BEING REPTD BY MOTHER 1ST PETITIONER RESIDING AT BASAVANAGUDI BEEDHI PETE HOLENARASIPURA TOWN HASSAN DISTRICT …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. AL KAYIM KHAN SUHIZE KHAN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS NO.488, 7TH CROSS SHANTHINAGARA, MYSURU 2. NAHEEM PASHA AGED ABOUT 45 YEAS S/O GULAM MOHIDDIN NO.336, 1ST STAGE, KESARE, MYSURU 3. CHOLAMANDALAM GENERAL INSU. CO.LTD. THE MANAGER MAIN OFFICE, CHENNAI REPTD. BY THE MANAGER CHOLAMANDALAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. J P NAGAR, 3RD PHASE BANGALORE - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37693 MFA No. 3262 of 2020 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R3; R2 - NAHEEM PASHA - SERVED VIDE ORDER DATED 27.07.2022, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.2052/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C., M.A.C.T, HOLENARASIPURA, 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 SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC.No.2052/2023 dated 19.11.2019 by the Senor Civil Judge and MACT, Holenarasipur whereby the Tribunal had fixed the liability on the owner of the vehicle and also granted only compensation of an amount of Rs.11,75,000/-, the claimants are before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation as well as on the ground that the Insurance Company is exonerated from the liability. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37693 MFA No. 3262 of 2020 2. The claim petition is filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.10,00,000/-. 3. The brief facts of the case are that on 27.09.2012 at about 3.30 a.m. when the deceased was attending nature call behind the canter vehicle, at that time the driver of the canter lorry moved the vehicle towards backside in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the deceased. As a result of which the head of the deceased got struck to the rear wheel of the said vehicle and he died at the spot. 4. The Tribunal had granted compensation as per the table given below: SL. No. Heads Compensation Awarded 1. Loss of dependency Rs. 10,80,000/- 2. Loss of consortium to 1st petitioner Rs. 40,000/- 3. Loss of love and affection to the petitioners Rs. 25,000/- 4. Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- 5. Funeral, obsequies and transportation of dead body Rs. 15,000/- TOTAL Rs. 11,75,000/- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37693 MFA No. 3262 of 2020 5. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that it is observed by the Tribunal that the driver of the offending vehicle had no valid and effective driving license to drive HGV as on the date of the accident. The 'B' extract produced by the claimant themselves as well as Ex.P.10 and the respondent No.3 as well as Ex.R.3 would clearly disclose that the driver of the canter lorry had no valid and effective driving license as on the date of the accident to drive the vehicle as such, the liability is fixed on the owner of the vehicle. It is submitted that even if there is violation of the terms and conditions of the policy and even if there is no valid driving licence still the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. Coming to the compensation, it is submitted that the Tribunal had failed to grant future prospects and also compensation granted by the Tribunal under the conventional heads is not just and reasonable. 6. Learned counsel appearing to respondent/Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal had rightly granted the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37693 MFA No. 3262 of 2020 compensation and rightly fixed the liability and there are no grounds to interfere. 7. Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the material on record. First, coming to the aspect of liability, the claimant is a third party to the insurance. Even if there is no valid driving licence to drive the vehicle still the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle, in the light of the law laid down in the case of 1Swaran Singh & Others. Coming to the compensation, this accident had taken place in the year 2012. The Tribunal had taken income Rs.8,000/- but as per the notional income, it has to be taken at an amount of Rs.7,000/-. His age is 38 years. The future prospects at 40% would come to an amount of Rs.2,800/-, which comes to an amount of Rs.9,800/- (Rs.7,000+Rs.2,800). As there are 5 claimants, 1/4th has to be deducted towards the personal expenses i.e., an amount of *Rs.2,450/-. Then the contribution to the family would be an amount of *Rs.7,350/-. Hence, loss of dependency would come to an amount of *Rs.13,23,000/- 1 (2004) 3 SCC 297 * Corrected vide chamber order dated: 19/12/2025. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37693 MFA No. 3262 of 2020 (Rs.7,350x12x15). Towards loss of consortium as there are 5 defendants an amount of Rs.2,20,000 (Rs.44,000x5) is granted. Towards Funeral expenses, an amount of Rs.36,000/- is granted by this Court. 8. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala vs. M. Malathi and Another2, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. 9. The claimant is therefore, entitled to the compensation under the following heads: SL. No. Heads Compensation Awarded by Tribunal Compensation Awarded by this Court 1. Loss of dependency Rs. 10,80,000/- 13,23,000/- 2. Loss of consortium to 1st petitioner Rs. 40,000/- 2,20,000/- 3. Loss of love and affection to the petitioners Rs. 25,000/- 00 4. Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- 00 5. Funeral, obsequies and transportation of dead body Rs. 15,000/- 36,000/- 2 (2014) 11 SCC 178 Page No. 7 is retyped and replaced vide chamber order dated: 19.12.2025. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37693 MFA No. 3262 of 2020 6. Legal Expenses Rs. 00 10,000/- TOTAL Rs. 11,75,000/- 15,89,000/- 10. Altogether the claimant is entitled for an amount of **Rs.15,89,000/-. Accordingly, the appeal of the claimant is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation from Rs.11,75,000/- to Rs.15,89,000/- ii) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. ii) The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Tribunal. iii) The respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security. iv) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. Page No. 8 is retyped and replaced vide chamber order dated: 19.12.2025. ** Corrected vide chamber order dated: 13/02/2026. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37693 MFA No. 3262 of 2020 v) The Insurance Company shall pay and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. vii) No costs. viii) Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE RJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15