- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104588 OF 2023 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 105665 OF 2023 IN MFA NO.104588/2023 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PARVATEVVA W/O. HANAMANTAPPA GOBBARAGUMPI, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O. RAINAPUR, NOW RESIDING AT GOKAK, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-593107. 2. SHRI FAKEERAPPA S/O. HANAMANTAPPA GOBBARAGUMPI, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O. RAINAPUR, NOW RESIDING AT GOKAK, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-593107. 3. SHRI MAHADEV S/O. HANAMANTAPPA GOBBARAGUMPI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O. RAINAPUR, NOW RESIDING AT GOKAK, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-593107. … APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SANTOSH S. HATTIKATAGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI. MALLIKARJUN S/O. RUDRAPPA TUBAKI, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O. SUTAGATTI, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI-593107. GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 2. SHRI. SOMALING S/O. IRAPPA MARIHAL, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. JANATA PLOT AT-MOHARE, POST: DESHNUR, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI-593107. 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BY ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI, DIST: BELAGAVI -593107. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI DEEPAK S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; SRI NAGANGOUDA R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE LEARNED I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, GOKAK IN M.V.C. NO.1083/2022 DATED 18.08.2023 BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE CLAIM PETITION, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN MFA NO.105665 OF 2023 : BETWEEN: THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI, REP. THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE, NO.5168, MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI. REP. THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. N.R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 AND: 1. SMT. PARVATEVVA HANUMAPPA GOBBARAGUMPI, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, 2. FAKEERAPPA HANUMAPPA GOBBARAGUMPI, AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, 3. MAHADEV HANUMAPPA GOBBARAGUMPI, AGE: 33 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 3 ARE RESIDENT OF RAINAPUR, NOW RESIDING AT GOKAK-590021. 4. SHRI. MALLIKARJUN RUDRAPPA TUBAKI, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O. SUTAGATTI, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI-590001. (DRIVER OF MAXI CAB BEARING NO.KA-22/D-4073) 5. SRI. SOMALING IRAPPA MARIHAL, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. JANATA PLOT AT-MOHARE, POST: DESHNUR, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI-590001. (OWNER OF MAXI CAB BEARING NO. KA-22/D-4073). …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SANTOSH S. HATTIKATAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R3; SRI. DEEPAK S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R4 & R5) [[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS CONNECTED WITH IN M.V.C. NO.1083/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, GOKAK AND SET ASIDE AWARD DATED 18.08.2023 AS AGAINST THE APPELLANT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY COMMON JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Challenging the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gokak (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for brevity), in MVC No.1083/2022 dated 18.08.2023, these two appeals were filed. 2. MFA No.104588/2023 is filed by the claimants seeking enhancement in compensation. 3. MFA No.105665/2023 is filed by the insurance company against which the liability is fixed, disputing its liability to pay compensation and also on the ground that the sum granted as compensation is exorbitant. 4. For the sake of convenience of discussion, the parties to the proceedings will hereinafter be referred to as ‘the claimants’ and ‘insurance company’. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 5. Heard Sri Santosh S. Httikatagi learned counsel for the claimants as well as Sri Naganagouda R. Kuppelur learned counsel for the insurance company. 6. Sri Nagangouda R. Kuppelur submits that the accident solely occurred due to the negligent driving of the deceased Hanamappa (hereinafter be referred to as ‘the deceased’ for brevity). Learned counsel submits that, the motorcycle which is involved in the accident belongs to his son i.e. the third claimant therein. The third claimant did not insure his motorcycle. Likewise, the deceased was not holding valid and effective driving license to ride motorcycle as on the date of accident. Thus it is clear that the accident occurred due to the sole negligence on the part of the deceased. But without appreciating the said fact, the Tribunal fastened liability against the insurance company with whom the maxi cab which is involved in the accident was insured at the relevant time. Learned counsel thereby seeks to exonerate the insurance company from liability to pay compensation. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 7. Sri Santosh S. Hattikatagi, on the other hand submits that the police officer who investigated the case came to a conclusion that the accident occurred solely due to the negligence of the driver of the maxi cab which is involved in the accident. Only because the deceased was not holding valid driving licence and that the vehicle of the third claimant was not insured, the insurance company cannot be exonerated from liability to pay compensation as the negligence lies on the part of the driver of the maxi cab which was insured with the insurance company. 8. The matrix of the case as projected by the claimant before the Tribunal is that on 07.02.2022, the deceased went to his agricultural land to attend his agricultural works on the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-24/X-8046. While he was returning and was proceeding towards Rainapur at a moderate speed on the left side of Belagavi-Bagalakote road and when he came near one Renuka Petrol Pump at about 11.30 a.m., a maxi cab bearing registration No.KA-22/D-4073, which was - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, came from behind and dashed against the motorcycle of the deceased, due to which, the deceased received fatal injuries and died. 9. 9. It is not in dispute that police after due investigation laid charge against the driver of the maxi cab which is involved in the accident with a due observation that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the said maxi cab. Equally it is not in dispute that the charge sheet is also laid against the deceased on the ground that he was driving the motorcycle without holding driving license and that the charge sheet has also shown claimant No.3 as one of the accused as the motorcycle which is involved in the accident stands on his name and that the said motorcycle was not insured at the relevant period. 10. The evidence of PW-2 who is stated to be an eyewitness to the accident is that he has agricultural land - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 near Renukadevi petrol bunk and he observed the maxi cab dashing against the vehicle of the deceased from back side and that the driver of the maxi cab drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner. 11. Thus the evidence of PW-2 coupled with the contents of charge sheet reveals that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the maxi cab which is involved in the accident. The insurance company did not produce any evidence to establish the aspect of negligence on the part of the deceased. Only because the vehicle of the third claimant which is involved in the accident was not insured at the relevant period and only because the deceased was not holding driving licence, it cannot be held that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased. The case facts clearly reveals that the maxi cab dashed against the vehicle of the deceased from backside. Therefore this Court is of the view that the plea taken by the insurance company regarding the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 negligence on the part of the deceased cannot be appreciated. 12. Now coming to the aspect of quantum, when the claimants contend that the amount awarded as compensation is on lower side, the insurance company projects that exorbitant amount is awarded as compensation. 13. Sri Santosh S.Hattikatagi learned counsel for the claimants submits that when the dependents are 3 in number, the Tribunal deducted 50% of the earnings of the deceased towards personal and living expenses which is improper. Learned counsel for the insurance company on the other hand states that claimants No.2 and 3 are having their own source of income and therefore they cannot be termed to be dependents of the deceased. 14. Giving reply to the said submission, learned counsel for the claimants placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Seema Rani & Ors. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 Vs. The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors, wherein their Lordships at paras 9 and 10 of the judgment held as follows: “9. We have heard the learned counsel for the Appellants. We are unable to agree with the view taken by the Tribunal on the dependents of the deceased. This Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Birender & Ors.1, had expounded that major married and earning sons of the deceased, being legal representatives, have a right to apply for compensation, and the Tribunal must consider the application, irrespective of whether the representatives are fully dependent on the deceased or not. The Court went on to conclude that since the sons, in that case, were earning merely Rs.1,50,000/- per annum, they were largely dependent on the earnings of the deceased and were staying with her. 10. Adverting to the facts at hand, on a perusal of the statement of Shashi Kumar, the son of the deceased (Appellant No.2 herein), annexed as Annexure P6, was working at a petrol pump, while the other son was involved in temporary employment opportunities only. Both of them were residing with the deceased. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that they were self-sufficient or independent of the deceased. Similarly, applying the exposition in Birender (Supra), there is no reason to exclude a married daughter from compensation. Therefore, in view of this, the High Court erred in excluding these dependants.” 15. Thus in the light of the decision that is referred supra this Court is of the view that the claimants No.2 and 3 can also be considered to be the dependents of the deceased and therefore the claimants being 3 in number, - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 1/3rd of the earnings of the deceased is required to be deducted towards personal and living expenses which the deceased would have incurred for himself had he been alive. 16. Now coming to the earnings of the deceased, as per the version of the claimants the deceased as an agricultural coolie was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. The Tribunal took the income of the deceased notionally as Rs.12,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the claimants submits that the accident occurred in the year 2022 and for the relevant period the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad is taking the notional income as Rs.14,750/- per month and at least the said figure should have been considered by the Tribunal. This Court finds justification in the submission thus made. Thus the notional income of the deceased is taken as Rs.14,750/- per month. The deceased being aged around 60 years by the date of accident, 10% of the earnings of the deceased are required to be added towards future prospects as per the decision of - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi1. Thus on adding 10% towards future prospects, on deducting 1/3rd of the earnings towards personal and living expenses which the deceased would have incurred for himself had he been alive and applying the appropriate multiplier ‘9’, the compensation which the claimants are entitled to receive under the head loss of dependency is as follows: Heads Amount in Rs. Notional income 14,750.00 Annual income 1,77,000.00 On adding 10% towards future prospects 1,94,700.00 On deducting 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses 1,29,800.00 Loss of dependency, on applying appropriate multiplier ‘9’ 11,68,200.00 17. Thus the claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.11,68,200/-. As the accident occurred in the year 2022, in the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi, the claimants 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 are entitled to Rs.16,500/- towards funeral expenses and Rs.16,500/- towards loss of estate. The first claimant being the wife of the deceased is entitled to Rs.44,000/- towards loss of spousal consortium, claimants No.2 and 3 being the children of the deceased are entitled to Rs.44,000/- towards loss of parental consortium. Also the claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.3,26,828/- towards medical expenses. Thus the compensation which the claimants are entitled to receive in total under different heads is as under: Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of dependency 11,68,200.00 Funeral expenses 16,500.00 loss of estate 16,500.00 loss of spousal consortium 44,000.00 loss of parental consortium 44,000.00 Medical expenses 3,26,828.00 TOTAL 16,16,028.00 18. Thus in the light of the aforementioned discussion, it is clear that the appeal filed by the insurance company lacks merits and that the appeal filed by the - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 claimants is to be allowed in part. Therefore both the appeals are disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The appeal in MFA No.105665/2023 is dismissed. (ii) The appeal in MFA No.104588/2023 is allowed in part. (iii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gokak through orders in M.V.C. No.1083/2022 dated 18.08.2023 is enhanced from Rs.12,24,428/- to Rs.16,16,028/-. (iv) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. (v) The insurance company directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of 8 weeks from - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13780 MFA No. 104588 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 105665 of 2023 the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. (vi) The apportionment made by the Tribunal applies to enhanced sum as well. (vii) On such deposit, the claimants are permitted to withdraw their respective shares. (viii) Amount if any in deposit be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal immediately. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE EM,RH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50