- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8864 MFA No. 103509 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103509 OF 2018 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. ARATI W/O SANTOSH VARMA, AGE: 36 YEARS, OCC: H.H.W., 2. SRI. KRISHNA S/O SANTOSH VARMA, AGE: 18 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, 3. SRI. KESHAVA S/O SANTOSH VARMA, AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, 4. SRI. CHAMPABAI W/O BHARATKUMAR VARMA, AGE: 58 YEARS, OCC: H.H.W., BOTH ARE R/O: NEAR LION SCHOOL, BESIDE DR. KANTHI HOUSE, BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT. NOTE: APPELLANT NO.3 IS MINOR R/BY N/G/M APPELLANT NO.1. … APPELLANTS (BY SRI. S.S. YALIGAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. KRISHNA S/O YAMANU, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF VEHICLE R/O: H.NO.841, KERITANDA WADI, TQ: CHITAPUR, DIST: KALBURGI-585 101. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CTS, 472-474, V.A. KALABURGI SQUARE, DESAI CROSS, DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580 009, Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8864 MFA No. 103509 of 2018 POLICY NO.1407702334000256, VALID FROM 10.05.2010 TO 09.05.2011. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1-DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.09.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.403/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.II, BAGALKOT AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT OF RS.26,94,000/- WITH COSTS. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) This appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, by the appellants/claimants, calling in question the judgment and award dated 14.09.2016, passed in M.V.C.No.403/2011, on the file of the Member, MACT-II, Bagalkot (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for brevity) seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. It is the case of the claimants that on 03.11.2010, at about 10.00 p.m., the deceased-Santosh Varma after completion of his work at Kamatagi, was returning to Bagalkot on motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-29/8296 at Shirur village, near Kakki halla bridge, at that time, a tanker bearing - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8864 MFA No. 103509 of 2018 Reg.No.KA-32/B-2012 was parked in the middle of the road without any signals or parking lights or indicators and a lorry came from opposite direction with high beam light. At that time, deceased was not able to see the tanker, which was parked in the middle of the road. Consequently, he hit the stationed vehicle from its back-side resulting in accident. Due to which, the deceased died on the spot. Upon the claim petition filed, the Tribunal while awarding compensation of Rs.15,32,000/- had held that the deceased has also attributed his negligence of 50% to the accident. Therefore, awarded 50% compensation of Rs.7,66,000/-. 3. Upon considering Ex.P1-FIR, Ex.P2-complaint, Ex.P3-chargesheet, Ex.P4-Panchanama etc., the entire allegation is against the driver of tanker lorry. The accident is caused on 03.11.2010 at night 10.00 p.m. The spot panchanama and spot sketch proved the fact that, the tanker lorry was parked on the middle of the road, there is no evidence of either the owner or the insurer that tanker lorry was parked with sufficient indicators or signals so as to invite attention of other road users that the tanker was stationed on - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8864 MFA No. 103509 of 2018 the middle of the road. Hence, there is violation of Regulation 3 of the Motor Vehicle (Driving) Regulations, 2017. But the Tribunal has committed error in fastening contributory negligence on part of the deceased at 50%. Though, the motorcycle was having head light, but the capacity of focus of head light is limited when motorcycle is coming at moderate speed and if any vehicle is parked on the road at night time, the rider of motorcycle could not see the focus at some distance of point. Therefore, it cannot be said that the deceased had contributory negligence and rashness. Though, in the complaint, eye witness stated that both drivers and rider of motorcycle and deceased are equally responsible but the fact that when bigger vehicle is parked on the middle of the road, due to any other contingencies, it is his duty to put signals and indicators or taking any other precautionary measures, making attention of other vehicles inverting attention that tanker lorry is stationed on the middle of the road, but there is no evidence in this regard what efforts were made by the driver of tanker lorry. Therefore, violation of Regulation 3 of the Motor Vehicle (Driving) Regulations, 2017 is proved. Therefore, the Tribunal is not correct in holding deceased has also contributory - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8864 MFA No. 103509 of 2018 negligence and rashness of accident. Therefore, to this extent, the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is set aside. Hence, it is held that the driver of the Tanker lorry was completely rash and negligent in stationing the Tanker lorry on the middle of the road without putting any indicators or signals. 4. The Tribunal has determined compensation of Rs.15,12,000/- under the head loss of dependency by holding notional income of Rs.7,000/- and further Rs.5,000/-, Rs.5,000/- and Rs.10,000/- on the heads of transportation of dead body, funeral expenses and loss of consortium respectively. Since as discussed above the contributory negligence attributed on part of the deceased is set aside, the Insurance Company shall pay the entire compensation to the claimant as determined by the Tribunal. Hence, the appeal is liable to be allowed in part. 5. Therefore, the claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.15,32,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition till realization as against Rs.7,66,000/-. The Insurance Company is directed - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8864 MFA No. 103509 of 2018 to deposit the compensation within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. 11. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 14.09.2016, passed in M.V.C.No.403/2011, on the file of the Member, MACT-II, Bagalkot, stands modified. iii. The claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.15,32,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization, as against the compensation of Rs.7,66,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. iv. The contributory negligence attributed on part of the deceased is set aside. v. The Insurance Company shall deposit entire compensation amount within a period of eight - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:8864 MFA No. 103509 of 2018 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. vi. The order with regard to apportionment of compensation, deposit and release of amount would be as per order of Tribunal. vii. The claimants are not entitled to interest for the delayed period of 621 days in filing the appeal. viii. Registry is directed to send back the Trial Court Records along with a copy of this judgment and award to the Tribunal. ix. No order as to costs. x. Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE RKM-para No.1 to 3 SRA-para No.4 to end CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 53