- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49300 MFA No. 4033 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4033 OF 2019 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. RITA @ SUJATHA, W/O ANTHONY RAJ, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, 2. ANTHONY RAJ, S/O LATE HRUDAYAPPA @ UDAYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT SIDDARAMANNA BEEDI, AMARANARAYANA BLOCK, MELEKOTE, KANAKAPURA TOWN - 562 117. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K. SHANTHARAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, K.S.R.T.C. DEPARTMENT, SHANTHINAGARA, K.H.ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 027. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. B.P. RADHA, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27/10/2014, PASSED IN MVC NO.1520/2014, ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-18), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. Digitally Signed by REKHA R Location : High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49300 MFA No. 4033 of 2019 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is by claimants seeking for enhancement of compensation arising out of the judgment and award dated 27.10.2014 in MVC No.1520/2014, passed by the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Court of Small Causes and MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-18), (‘the Tribunal’ for short). 2. The date of accident, involvement of vehicle, the death of Shantharaj S/o Anthony Raj, and the liability to pay compensation are not in dispute. The only dispute is with regard to quantum of compensation. 3. Heard Sri K. Shantharaj, learned counsel for the appellants and Smt. B.P. Radha, learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation. 4. Sri Shantaraj, learned counsel for the appellants mainly argues on three counts: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49300 MFA No. 4033 of 2019 4.1 Firstly, he has submitted that the Tribunal erred in taking the income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month, which is contrary to the notional income of Rs.8,500/- per month, for the year 2014 as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (‘KSLSA’ for short). He further contended that the Tribunal failed to add the appropriate percentage towards ‘Future Prospects’, though the deceased was aged 26 years at the time of the accident and therefore, entitled to such addition in terms of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd vs. Pranay Sethi1. 4.2 Secondly, it is argued that the Tribunal has erred in adopting the multiplier on the basis of the age of the younger parent. In view of the settled position of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another2, the age of the deceased is 1 2017 (16) SCC 680 2 AIR 2009 SCC 3104 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49300 MFA No. 4033 of 2019 the determining factor for selecting the appropriate multiplier. Since the deceased was aged 26 years at the time of the accident, the appropriate multiplier to be applied is ‘17’. 4.3 Thirdly, the compensation awarded under the conventional heads is on the lower side, and the Tribunal has failed to apply 10% escalation as per the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Pranay Sethi stated supra. On these counts, learned counsel sought enhancement of compensation. 5. Conversely, Smt. B.P. Radha supported the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. However, to the query of the Court, Smt. B.P. Radha is not in dispute with regard to Rs.8,500/- per month fixed under the chart for the accident in 2014 prepared by the KSLSA, as also the consideration of the multiplier with respect to the age of deceased. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49300 MFA No. 4033 of 2019 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the entire appeal papers as well as the trial Court record. 7. The date of accident i.e. 24.03.2014 is not in dispute. As per the chart prepared by the KSLSA for the year 2014 the notional income fixed is at Rs.8,500/- per month. The Tribunal has considered the income at Rs.6,000/- per month and also applied the multiplier based on the age of the deceased. In view of the settled position of law by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma stated supra, the age of the deceased is the determining factor for determining the appropriate multiplier. 8. In view of the settled position of law by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi stated supra, 40% is required to be added to the existing income i.e., Rs.8,500/- towards ‘Loss of Future prospects’. 9. Considering the age of the deceased as 26 years at the time of the accident, appropriate multiplier would be ‘17’. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49300 MFA No. 4033 of 2019 10. A perusal of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal clearly shows that the amount granted under the conventional heads is on the lower side and the claimants are also entitled for 10% escalation on conventional heads. Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and calls for interference with the award and requires re-assessment. 11. For the foregoing reasons, the compensation re-assessment comes to: Sl.No. Heads Amount in Rs. 1. Loss of Dependency (8,500+40%)x12x17x50%) 12,13,800/- 2. Loss of Filial Consortium (40,000 x 2) 80,000/- 3. Loss of Estate 15,000/- 4. Funeral Expenses 15,000/- 6. 20% Escalation (80,000+15,000+15,000/10%x2) (10% escalation on conventional heads for two terms) 22,000/- TOTAL 13,45,800/- 12. Thus, the total re-determined compensation works out to Rs.13,45,800/- as against Rs.8,01,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49300 MFA No. 4033 of 2019 13. The re-determined compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation, excluding 1,554 days of delay in preferring the appeal. 14. Accordingly for the forgoing reasons this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 27.10.2014 in MVC No.1520/2014, passed by the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Court of Small Causes and MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-18) is hereby modified and enhanced Rs.13,45,800/- additionally. iii. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. iv. The claimants are not entitled to any interest for the delay period of 1,554 days in preferring - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49300 MFA No. 4033 of 2019 the appeal, in terms of the order dated 01.07.2025. v. Respondent No.2-Corporation shall deposit the enhanced compensation along with accrued interest stated subject to (iv) supra within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. vi. On deposit, the entire amount along with accrued interest shall be released in favour of the claimants/appellants as per the apportionment directed by the Tribunal. vii. No order as to costs. Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE TMP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 37