- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36339 MFA No. 2209 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6040 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2209 OF 2022 (MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6040 OF 2022 (MV-D) IN MFA No. 2209/2022 BETWEEN: LEGAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., RGIC NO.28, EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. PREETHI D., W/O LATE MANJUNATHA C., D/O DEVARAJA, A., AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS. 2. ADARSH NAYAKA M., S/O LATE MANJUNATHA C., NOW AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS. 3. KHUSHI, D/O LATE MANJUNATHA C., NOW AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS. 4. ATHITHI M., D/O LATE MANJUNATHA C., NOW AGED ABOUT 2 YEARS. 5. CHITRALINGAPPA, S/O LATE LAKSHMAYA Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36339 MFA No. 2209 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6040 of 2022 NOW AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 ARE MINORS REP BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER ALL ARE R/O. MYSARAHATY VILLAGE, HIREKEREHALLI, MOLAKALUMURU TALUK, CHITRADURGA DIST. 6. K. GOUS PASHA S/O KHASHEEM ALI, MAJOR, R/O NEAR MARUTHI TEMPLE, HALEBANDI HARALAPURA, KOPPAL - 583 234. 7. HANUMA REDDAPPA S/O VIRUPAKSHA MALA GOWDAR, MAJOR, INSURANCE POLICY HOLDER, OF TATA PICKUP VEHICLE NO. KA 3704764, R/O MUTTAL POST SIRUR(T) YALBURGA (D) – 583 236. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRAMOD, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4 (R2 TO R4 MINORS REPRESENTED BY R1) R5 SERVED, R56 SERVED AND R7 SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.01.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.38/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM HOLDING CONCURRENT CHARGE OF 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND M.A.C.T. NO.IV, CHITRADURGA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.28,00,400/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS DEPOSIT. IN MFA NO. 6040/2022 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. PREETHI D., W/O LATE MANJUNATHA C., D/O DEVARAJA A., AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS. 2. ADARSH NAYAKA M., S/O LATE MANJUNATHA C., AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36339 MFA No. 2209 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6040 of 2022 3. KHUSHI D/O LATE MANJUNATHA C., AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS. 4. ATHITHI M., D/O LATE MANJUNATHA C., AGED ABOUT 2 YEARS. 5. CHITRALINGAPPA S/O LATE LAKSHMAYYA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, APPELLANT NO.2 TO 4 ARE MINORS REP BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. PREETHI D-APPELLANT NO.1 ALL ARE PERMANENT RESIDENT OF MYSARAHATTY VILLAGE, HIREKERHALLI, MOLAKALMURU TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT – 577 501. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. B. PRAMOD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. K. GOUS PASHA, S/O KAHASEEM ALI, MAJOR, RC OWNER OF TATA PICK UP VEHICLE, BEARING REG NO.KA 37 D 4764, R/O NEAR MARUTHI TEMPLE, HALEBANDI, HARLAPURA, KOPPALA – 583 234. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, MAGANUR COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, B.D. ROAD, CHITRADURGA TOWN – 577 501. KAVITHA 3. HANUMARADDEPPA, S/O VIRUPAKSHA MALA GOUDAR, MAJOR, INSURANCE POLICY HOLDER, OF TATA PICK UP VEHICLE, BEARING REG KA 37 D 4764, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36339 MFA No. 2209 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6040 of 2022 R/O MUTTAL POST, SIRURU TALUK, YELBURGA DISTRICT – 583 236. PIN – 572 113. ...RESPONDENTS (R1 SERVED SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2, R3 SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.01.01.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.38/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM HOLDING C/C OF 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT-IV, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, 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.38/2020 dated 01.01.2022 by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge & Additional MACT-IV, Chitradurga, whereby the Tribunal had granted compensation of an amount of Rs.28,00,400/-, both the Insurance Company and the claimants are before this Court. The Insurance Company’s appeal is MFA.No.2209/2022 and the claimants’ appeal is MFA.No.6040/2022. 2. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/- for the death of the deceased in a motor vehicle accident. The facts of the case are that on 11.12.2019, the deceased was riding his motor cycle from - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36339 MFA No. 2209 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6040 of 2022 Gudekote village heading towards Hirekerahalli Village. When the motor cycle came in between Gudekote - Hangal, near KEB Office at Gudekote village, at about 6:20 p.m., the driver of the TATA Pick-up vehicle came in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed to the deceased. Due to the accident, the deceased fell down and sustained severe injuries to the vital organs of the body and died at the spot. 3. The Tribunal had granted compensation as per the table given below: SL. No. Heads Compensation Awarded 1. Loss of dependency : Rs. 25,70,400/- 2. Loss of estate : Rs. 15,000/- 3. Funeral expenses : Rs. 15,000/- 4. Loss of spousal consortium : Rs. 40,000/- 5. Loss of parental consortium : Rs. 40,000/- 6. Loss of filial consortium : Rs. 1,20,000/- TOTAL : Rs. 28,00,400/- 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that it is a head-on collision and the deceased was not having a valid driving license to drive the vehicle and there is - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36339 MFA No. 2209 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6040 of 2022 contributory negligence on the part of the deceased and this aspect was not considered by the Tribunal. It is submitted that as it is head-on collision, the Tribunal ought to have apportioned the contributory negligence on the deceased. It is submitted that as per the IMV Report, the complete right side of the vehicle is damaged. This aspect was also not considered by the Tribunal. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants submits that the accident had taken place in the year 2019. But the Tribunal had taken the income of the deceased at Rs.12,000/- per month which is on the lower side and the compensation needs to be enhanced. It is submitted that even on the conventional heads also, the amount that is awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. Coming to the submission of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company with regard to the contributory negligence, it is the case of the Insurance Company that there is contributory negligence on the part of the claimant and the deceased was not having a driving - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36339 MFA No. 2209 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6040 of 2022 license and the right side of the offending vehicle is damaged. No sketch is placed before the Court. Basing on the IMV Report, this Court cannot come to the conclusion that at which side of the road, the accident had taken place, whether it is extreme right side to the offending vehicle or the extreme right side of the vehicle of the deceased. If the Insurance Company is relying on that, it is the obligation of the Insurance Company to place the sketch before the Court which is not placed and mere not having a driving license cannot be a ground for this Court to come to the conclusion that there is contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. Hence, this Court do not find any reasons to entertain the appeal filed by the Insurance Company. 7. Coming to the appeal filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of the compensation, the accident had taken place in the year 2019. Hence, as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the notional income of the deceased has to be taken at Rs.14,000/- per month. As the deceased was aged about 29 years, future prospects at 40% will come to Rs.5,600/- i.e., Rs.19,600/- (Rs.14,000+ - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36339 MFA No. 2209 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6040 of 2022 Rs.5,600). As there are five claimants, 1/4th has to be deducted towards personal expenses i.e., Rs.4,900/-. Then his contribution to the family would be Rs.14,700/-. Hence, towards loss of dependency, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.29,98,800/- (Rs.14,700x12x17). As there are five claimants, towards loss of consortium, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.2,20,000/- (Rs.44,000x5). Towards funeral expenses, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.36,000/-. 8. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala Vs. M. Malathi and Another1, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. 9. The claimants are entitled for compensation under the following heads: SL. No. Heads Compensation Awarded by Tribunal Compensation Awarded by this Court 1. Loss of dependency : Rs. 25,70,400/- 29,98,800/- 2. Loss of estate : Rs. 15,000/- 00/- 3. Funeral expenses : Rs. 15,000/- 36,000/- 1 (2014) 11 SCC 178 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36339 MFA No. 2209 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6040 of 2022 4. Loss of consortium : Rs. 2,00,000/- 2,20,000/- 5. Legal Expenses : Rs. 00/- 10,000/- TOTAL : Rs. 28,00,400/- 32,64,800/- Enhancement : Rs. 4,64,400/- 10. Altogether, the claimant is entitled for compensation of an amount of Rs.32,64,800/-. 11. Accordingly, MFA.No.6040/2022 filed by the claimants is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.28,00,400/- to Rs.32,64,800/-. 12. MFA.No.2209/2022 filed by the Insurance Company is dismissed. i. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. ii. The amount in deposit shall be forthwith transmitted to the Tribunal. iii. The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Tribunal. iv. The 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 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36339 MFA No. 2209 of 2022 C/W MFA No. 6040 of 2022 claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security. 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. No costs. vii. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11