- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35411 MFA No. 1428 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 1171 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1428 OF 2018 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1171 OF 2020 (MV-D) IN MFA No. 1428/2018 BETWEEN: THE MANAGER RELIANCE GIC LTD., UNNATI ARCADE, 5/111, 6/112, 1ST FLOOR, 1ST BLOCK, DR.RAJKUMAR ROAD, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-10 NOW REP. BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, NO.28,M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MANJUNATHA S/O PUTTAMADAIAH, R/AT NO.332, BHUVANESWARINAGAR, 68TH CROSS, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE-10 2. HARISH S/O NIJALINGAPPA D.S., MAJOR, NO.286, DABBEGATTA, Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35411 MFA No. 1428 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 1171 of 2020 MADHUGIRI TALUK, TUMKUR DIST-572 117 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 16.12.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.6218/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 22ND ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & 20TH ACMM & MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,98,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 8% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT. IN MFA NO. 1171/2020 BETWEEN: MANJUNATHA S/O PUTTAMADAIAH, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, R/AT NO. 332, BHUVANESHWARINAGAR 68TH CROSS, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 010 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. SATHEESH H K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. HARISH S/O NIJALINGAPPA D.S., NO.286, DABBEGATTA MADHUGIRI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 2. THE MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., UNNATI ARCADE, NO.5/111 AND 6/112 1ST FLORE, 1ST BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU -560 010 ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2 R1- SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.12.2017 PASSED IN MVC - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35411 MFA No. 1428 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 1171 of 2020 NO.6218/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XXII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JJUDGE AND XX ACMM AND MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-24), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, 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.6218/2016 dated 16.12.2017 by the XXII Addl. Small Causes Judge and XX ACMM and Member, MACT, Bengaluru, the Insurance Company as well as the claimant are before this Court. The Insurance Company has filed MFA.No.1428/2018 and the claimant has filed MFA.No.1171/2020. The claim petition is filed by the son of the deceased seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- for the death of the deceased. 2. It is the case of the claimant that on 25.07.2016 at about 3.30 pm., the deceased was waiting to cross the road near Magadi-Bangalore Main road, Chikkagollarahatti bus stand, DasanapuraHobli, Bangalore North Taluk, at that time the tempo was coming from Bangalore towards Magadi being driven by its driver rashly and negligently with high speed, endangering to human life and property and dashed against the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35411 MFA No. 1428 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 1171 of 2020 deceased. Due to impact, the deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries all over the body. Immediately she was shifted to Sree Ram Hospital, Sunkadakatte, in the said hospital doctors made best efforts, but the injured succumbed to death on the same day. The Tribunal had taken the income at Rs.2,000/- and awarded the compensation as per the table given below. Sl. No. Heads Rs. Compensation amount awarded 1. Loss of dependency Rs. 1,68,000/- 2. Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- 3. Transportation of body, funeral and obsequies ceremony expenses Rs. 15,000/- Total Rs. 1,98,000/- 3. When it comes to the liability, it is the case of Insurance Company that the driver is having a license to drive a LMV non-transport vehicle, but the vehicle that he was driving is a transport vehicle as such the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation. That contention is negatived by the Tribunal. Aggrieved thereby the Insurance Company is before this Court and the claimant is seeking enhancement of the compensation. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35411 MFA No. 1428 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 1171 of 2020 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that as there is violation of the terms and conditions of the policy and as he is not having a valid driving licence, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation. It is further submitted that the Tribunal had rightly considered and granted the compensation and no interference is called for. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that as this accident had taken place in the year 2016, the Tribunal ought to have taken the income at Rs.9,500/- per month. It is submitted that as the son is the dependent and the Tribunal ought to have taken the income as per the table and ought to have granted the compensation. 6. In response to that, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that the claimant is the son of the deceased, who is 37 years old and he cannot be termed as a dependent. He relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Vinish Jain and others1. It is submitted that the Tribunal has 1 (2018) 3 SCC 619 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35411 MFA No. 1428 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 1171 of 2020 awarded the interest at the rate of 8% instead of 6% which needs to be reduced. 7. Learned counsel for the claimant had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Seema Rani and Others Vs. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Others2, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court had considered the judgment in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Birender3 and had considered the claimant as the dependent. 8. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. First coming to the contention of the Insurance Company with regard to the LMV transport and non transport, this issue is no more res-integra. In the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Mukund Dewangan V/s Oriental Insurance company Ltd.4, still the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation. 2 2025 INSC 192 3 AIR 2020 SC 434 4 (2017) 14 SCC 663 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35411 MFA No. 1428 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 1171 of 2020 9. Then coming to the compensation, the deceased is 61 years and the claimant is her son. This Court, considering the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Seema Rani's case referred supra is inclined to consider the son as a dependent. As this accident was occurred in the year 2016, as per the table for the year 2016, this Court is taking the income at Rs.9,500/- per month, 50% of it comes to Rs.4,750/-. Hence, this Court is granting an amount of (4,750X12X7)= Rs.3,99,000/- towards loss of dependency, towards loss of Consortium this Court is granting an amount of Rs.44,000/-, towards funeral expenses this Court is granting an amount of Rs.36,000/-. 10. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala vs. M. Malathi and Another5, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. 11. The claimant is therefore, entitled to the compensation under the following heads: Sl. No. Heads Rs. Compensation amount awarded by Compensation amount awarded by 5 (2014) 11 SCC 178 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35411 MFA No. 1428 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 1171 of 2020 the Tribunal this Court 1. Loss of dependency Rs. 1,68,000/- 3,99,000/- 2. Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- - 3. Loss of Consortium Rs. - 44,000/- 4. Transportation of body, funeral and obsequies ceremony expenses Rs. 15,000/- 36,000/- 5. Legal expenses Rs. - 10,000/- Total Rs. 1,98,000/- 4,89,000/- Enhanced amount Rs. 2,91,000/- 12. Altogether, the claimant is entitled for compensation of an amount of Rs.4,89,000/-. 13. Accordingly, MFA.No.1428/2018 filed by the Insurance Company is partly allowed by reducing the compensation from 8% to 6% per annum. 14. Accordingly, MFA.No.1171/2020 filed by the claimant is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.1,98,000/- to Rs.4,89,000/- and the Insurance Company shall pay the compensation. i) The entire amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35411 MFA No. 1428 of 2018 C/W MFA No. 1171 of 2020 ii) The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Tribunal. iii) The amount in deposit shall be forthwith transferred to the Tribunal. iv) 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. v) 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. vi) On 08.09.2025, the delay of 678 days is condoned by this Court on the condition that the claimant will not be entitled for the interest in case of enhancement. Hence, Insurance Company is not liable to pay the interest for the delayed period. vii) No costs. viii) Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7