- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 23194 OF 2013 (MV-) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 23195 OF 2013 IN MFA NO. 23194 OF 2013 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. GEETABAI @ BABE W/O HEERASA MEHARWADE AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: TAILOR, 2. RANJANA D/O HEERASA MEHARWADE AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: NIL, 3. KOMAL D/O HEERASA MEHARWADE AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: NIL, 4. SANTOSH S/O. HEERASA MEHARWADE AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC:STUDENT, ALL ARE R/O: ADARSH NAGAR, GADAG. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. S.M. KALWAD, ADV) AND: 1. MUNISWAMI S/O ANJANAPPA KYARKATTI AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O : VEERAPUR ONI, DHARWAD. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO, LTD ENKAY COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR, HUBLI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S. ARANI, ADV FOR R2, NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED) MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:04-01-2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.274/2005 ON THE FILE OF PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, GADAG, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 23195 OF 2013 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. GEETABAI @ BABE W/O HEERSA MEHARWADE, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: TAILOR, R/O: ADARSH NAGAR, GADAG. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S.M. KALWAD, ADV) AND: 1. MUNISWAMI S/O ANJANAPPA KYARKATTI AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O : VEERAPUR ONI, DHARWAD. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD ENKAY COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR, HUBLI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAJASHEKAR S. ARANI, ADV FOR R2, NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED) MFA FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:04/01/2013 PASSED IN MVC.NO.275/2005 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT, AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT., GADAG, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) 1. The petitioners, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation and fastening of liability, have filed these appeals against the common judgment and award dated 04.01.2013 passed in MVC Nos.274 and 275 of 2005 by the learned Fast Track Court and Additional MACT, Gadag (for short, ‘the Tribunal’). 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of these appeals are as follows: 3. On 23.05.2005, the petitioners and Heerasa Revansa Meharwade, were traveling in a Tata Sumo bearing registration No.KA-25/M3936. The driver of the Tata Sumo was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and lost control on the vehicle and as a result, it turtle down by the side of the road. The petitioners and Heerasa sustained grievous injuries and Heerasa - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 succumbed to the injuries. The legal representatives of the Heerasa filed a claim petition in MVC No.274/2025 seeking compensation on account of death of Heerasa. The petitioner in MVC No.275/2005 sustained injuries and filed said the claim petition. The other inmates have also filed the claim petitions. 4. Notice was issued and despite the service of notice, respondent no.1-the owner of the offending vehicle, remained unrepresented and was placed exparte. 5. Respondent No.2 - Insurance Company of the offending vehicle filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petitions. It is contended that as of the date of accident, the driver of the Tata Sumo was not possessing a valid and effective driving license and contended that there was a violation of policy condition and the petitioners and inmates were traveling as paid passengers. As such, clearly, there is a breach of policy conditions. Hence, the Insurance - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 Company is not liable to indemnify the owner of the Tata Sumo in question. Hence, he prays to dismiss the claim petitions against the Insurance Company. 6. The Tribunal, clubbed all the claim petitions and framed the separate issues. 7. The petitioners were examined themselves as PW-1 to PW-4 and examined the doctor as PW-5 and marked 15 documents as Exhibits P-1 to P-15. The officer of the Insurance Company was examined as RW-1 and marked one document as Ex.D-1. 8. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence allowed the claim petitions in part and awarded a compensation of ₹ 4,88,000/- in MVC No. 274/2005 and ₹ 68,400/- in MVC No. 275/2005 with 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till its realization. The owner of the offending vehicle was held liable to pay the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 compensation and the Tribunal directed him to deposit the compensation amount. 9. The petitioners, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, filed these appeals. 10. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the Insurance Company. 11. Learned counsel for the petitioners in MFA No. 23194/2013 submitted that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is on the lower side and he also submitted that the tribunal instead of deducting 1/4th, has deducted 1/3rd and the compensation awarded by the tribunal is on the lower side. It is further contended that the Tribunal has fastened the liability only on the owner of the offending vehicle without there being any material documents placed to show that the inmates of the offending vehicle were fair paid passengers in the offending vehicle. It is contended that the insurance - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 company has failed to prove that the inmates of the vehicle were the paid passengers. Hence on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal filed in MFA No. 23194/2013 and seeks to enhance the compensation. 12. Learned counsel in MFA No. 23195/2013 submitted that the petitioner to prove the disability, examined the doctor as PW-5 and he opined that the petitioner in MVC No. 275/2005 has suffered a permanent disability to the extent of 40%, wherein the Tribunal has taken 10% disability which is on the lower side. He also submitted that the compensation awarded by the tribunal on the other heads is also on the lower side. It is further contended that the insurance company has failed to prove that the inmates of the vehicle were the paid passengers and therefore, the judgement and award passed by the Tribunal, fastening the liability only on the owner of the offending vehicle is arbitrary. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal in MFA No.23195/2013. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 13. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the inmates of the offending vehicle were travelling as the paid passengers. There is a violation of policy conditions. The Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation as claimed by the petitioners. It is submitted that the tribunal was justified in dismissing the claim petition against the Insurance Company and rightly saddled the liability on the owner of the offending vehicle. He also submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is exorbitant. Hence, on these grounds, prays to dismiss the appeals. 14. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 15. The point that would arise for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation and liability. 16. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of accident and death of Heerasa and injuries sustained by other inmates. The petitioners, to prove that the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 accident occurred due to a rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle, filed a charge sheet marked as Exhibit P6, which discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. Reg.Liability: 17. The respondent – Insurance Company has taken a specific contention in the written statement that the inmates of the offending vehicle were traveling as the paid passengers. There is violation of the policy conditions. During the cross-examination, the petitioners have admitted that they were travelling in the offending vehicle as paid passengers. The said admission is sufficient to hold that the petitioners were travelling as the paid passengers. Thus, there is violation of the policy conditions. 18. Admittedly, as of the date of accident, the vehicle was insured by the insurance company. In view of the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 proposition laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BIJAPUR, BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER VS. YELLAVVA AND ANOTHER, reported in ILR 2020 KAR 2239, wherein this court has held that, in case if there is any breach of policy conditions, the insurance company has to deposit the compensation amount first and then, proceed to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. 19. The Tribunal did not consider the said aspect and directed the owner of the offending vehicle to deposit the compensation amount. 20. At the cost of repetition, it has to be stated here that the policy of insurance was valid as of the date of accident. The Insurance Company should pay the compensation amount first and then proceed to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. Though the tribunal was justified in saddling the liability - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 on the owner of the offending vehicle, however, the insurance company must pay the compensation and recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle. In view of the above discussion the point for consideration on liability is answered accordingly. Reg. Quantum of Compensation: i. In MFA No. 23194 of 2013: 21. The deceased Heerasa was aged about 45 years as of the date of accident and it is contended that he was working as a Tailor and earning ₹ 20,000/- per month. To substantiate the said income, the petitioners have not produced the proof of income of the deceased Heerasa. In the absence of proof, this court assesses the income at ₹ 3,500/- as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. 22. The accident is of the year 2005. This Court assess the income at ₹3,500/- and as the deceased was aged about 45 years, 25% future prospect is to be added to ₹3,500 i.e., ₹3,500/- + ₹ 875 = ₹4,375/- and 1/4th is - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased i.e., ₹4,375/- - ₹1,093/- =₹ 3,282/-. The multiplier applicable to the age group of the deceased is ‘14’. 23. Thus, the petitioners in MFA No.23194 of 2013 are entitled for compensation of ₹5,51,376/- (₹ 3,282/- X 12X 14) towards ‘loss of dependency’. 24. The deceased was survived by wife and three children and hence, all the four petitioners are entitled to a sum of ₹48,000/- each i.e., ₹1,92,000/- in all towards ‘loss of consortium’. 25. In addition, the petitioners are also entitled to a sum of ₹36,000/- towards the ‘loss of estate and funeral expenses’. 26. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to a total compensation of ₹7,79,376/- as against ₹ 4,88,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Thus, the petitioners are entitled to an enhanced compensation of ₹2,91,376/-. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 ii. In MFA No.23195 of 2013: 27. The petitioner contended that she met with an accident and sustained the injuries. To prove the disability, the petitioner examined the doctor as PW-5. He has deposed that he examined the petitioner in MVC No.275/2005 clinically and radiologically and opined that the Petitioner has suffered a permanent disability to an extent of 35 to 40%, wherein the tribunal has assessed the disability at 10%, which is on lower side. This Court, having considered the evidence of PW-5, and disability certificate marked at Ex.P13, re-assessed the disability at 12%. 28. The petitioner has contended that she was a Tailor and was earning ₹20,000/- per month. To establish her income, the petitioner has not produced any proof of income. In the absence of income proof, this court assessed the notional income as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, according to which, the accident is of the - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 year 2005, the notional income is taken at ₹3,500/- per month. The petitioner was aged about 36 years as of the date of accident and the appropriate multiplier applicable to the said age is ‘15’ . 29. Thus, considering the evidence of PW-5 and the disability certificate marked at Ex.P-13, this court reassessed the compensation under the following heads. Sl. No. Heads. Amount in (Rs.) 1. Towards loss of future earning capacity (Rs.3,500/- x 12 x 12% x ‘15’) 75,600/- 2. Towards medical expenses 3,000/- 3. Towards travelling and other expenses 1,000/- 4. Towards nourishment and attendant’s charges 2,000/- 5. Towards loss of amenities 25,000/- Total: 1,06,600/- LESS Compensation awarded by the Tribunal 68,400/- Enhanced compensation 38,200/- Thus, the petitioner in this appeal is entitled to a total compensation of ₹1,06,600/- as against ₹68,400/- awarded - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 by the Tribunal. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of ₹38,200/-. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order. ORDER (I) The Miscellaneous First Appeals are allowed in part. (II) The impugned common judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is hereby, modified. (III) The petitioners in MFA No.23194 of 2013 are entitled to enhanced compensation of ₹2,91,376/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization; (IV) The petitioner in MFA No.23195 of 2013 are entitled to enhanced compensation of ₹38,200/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization; - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12041 MFA No. 23194 of 2013 C/W MFA No. 23195 of 2013 (V) The respondent-insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation with accrued interest and then to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle, in accordance with law. (VI) The insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation amount within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (VII) The office is directed to transmit the TCRs to the Tribunal. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE SKS CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8