- 1 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 07TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4591 OF 2019 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RAJI. K W/O LATE VALSARAJAN K @ VALSARAJ K AGED 44 YEARS 2. AVANI K D/O LATE VALSARAJAN K @ VALSARAJ K AGED 15 YEARS 3. DEVAKIYAMMA K W/O LATE MADHAVAN NAMBIAR @ MADHAVAN AGED 83 YEARS APPELLANT NO.2 IS MINOR REPRESENTED BY THE NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER APPELLANT NO.1 SMT.RAJI K R/AT KANHIRAPUZHA CHEPPATHODE VELLORA KANNUR KAKKARA KERALA PIN-670 306. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR G SHASTRY, ADVOCATE) - 2 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 AND: 1. S. ABBAS S/O IBRAHIM ADULT R/AT NISHA BAGH SAJIPANADU POST AND VILLAGE BANTWAL TALUK D K DISTRICT PIN-574 219. 2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. 4TH FLOOR, FORTUNE BUILDING OPP.ATHENA HOSPITAL AVERY JUNCTION, FALNIR MANGALURU REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER PIN-575 003. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AKSHAY P.V. ADVOCATE FOR SRI A. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; NOTICE TO R-1 IS D/W, V/O DTD:13.07.2022) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO MODIFY/SET-ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.09.2018 IN MVC NO.1534/2017 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE VI ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE & MACT, D.K., MANGALURU AND CLAIM PETITION BE ALLOWED AS PRAYED IN THIS APPEAL BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS THROUGH OUT IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 24.10.2025 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO CAV JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short ‘MV Act’) to modify/set-aside the judgment and award dated 29.09.2018 in MVC No.1534/2017 passed by the VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, MACT, D.K., Mangaluru (herein after referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for short) and allow the claim petition filed by the claimants. 2. The appellants/respondents herein are the claimants/respondents before the Tribunal. Brief facts of the case are that:- 3. The petitioners/claimants have filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the MV Act claiming compensation from the respondents due to the death of Valsarajan K. @ Valsaraj K. in the road traffic accident from the date of petition till the date of realization contending they are the Legal Representatives of Valsarajan K. @ Valsaraj K. - 4 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 4. On 31.08.2017 at about 5.10 p.m, the deceased Shri Valsarajan K. @ Valsaraj K., husband of petitioner No.1, father of petitioner No.2 and son of petitioner No.3, was standing on the mud portion of Kuthar–Mangaluru Road, near Kuttaru Rajarajeshwari Temple Bus Stop, Munnur Village, Mangaluru. At that time, a bus bearing registration No.KA-19- AA-8909, driven in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed by its driver, came from Kuttaru towards Mangaluru and dashed against the deceased. 5. Due to the said impact, the deceased fell down and the rear wheel of the bus ran over his head, causing instantaneous death at the spot. The body was thereafter shifted to Yenepoya Medical College and Hospital, where the duty Medical Officer confirmed his death. Following inquest and post-mortem formalities, the body was handed over to the petitioners and cremated at their native place after incurring expenses of about Rs.2,00,000/-. 6. At the time of the accident, the deceased was aged 45 years, hale and healthy, and was employed as a Security Guard with Malabar Gold and Diamonds, Kannur, earning a monthly salary of Rs.13,500/- with additional quarterly - 5 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 incentives of Rs.1,950/-. He was also running a saloon under the name “Steps and Style” at Thannirubavi, Mangaluru, on a rental basis, earning approximately Rs.20,000/- per month. Thus, his total monthly income amounted to Rs.34,150/-. The deceased was experienced and had prospects of increased earnings in future. The petitioners, who were entirely dependent on his income, have thereby suffered severe financial and emotional loss due to his untimely demise. 7. The Ullal Police registered a criminal case against the driver of the said bus in Crime No.421/2017. The respondent No.1 is the owner of the offending vehicle, and respondent No.2 is its insurer under Policy No.67080031150100012001, valid from 02.03.2017 to 01.03.2018. In spite of service of notice, respondent No.1 remained ex-parte. The respondent No.2, through its counsel, filed a written statement contesting the claim. Hence, the claimants have sought just compensation from the respondents for the loss caused by the rash and negligent act of the driver of the offending vehicle. 8. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would contend that the deceased was employed as a Security - 6 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 Guard with Malabar Gold and Diamonds, Kannur. He was earning a monthly salary of Rs.13,500/- along with incentives of Rs.1,950/- once in every three months and was additionally running a saloon under the name “Steps & Styles” at Thannirubavi, Mangaluru, from which he was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, as evidenced by Ex.P10 – the rent agreement produced by PW3, the owner of the said premises. 9. It is contended that the Tribunal erroneously took only Rs.13,500/- as his monthly income as against the claimed income of Rs.34,150/-, and further failed to award proper compensation under the head of “loss of consortium”, though each of the appellants is legally entitled to Rs.48,000/- each under the said head. 10. The learned counsel for the respondent–insurance company, while opposing the appeal, would contend that the Tribunal has rightly assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.13,500/- based on the cogent documentary evidence produced, namely the salary certificate (Ex.P8), and pay slip (Ex.P14) issued by Malabar Gold and Diamonds, Kannur. It is further submitted that the claim of the deceased having derived an additional income of Rs.20,000/- per month - 7 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 from an alleged saloon business at Thannirbavi, Mangaluru, is wholly unsubstantiated and improbable, as the evidence on record reveals that the deceased was employed full-time in Kerala. 11. It is also contended that the rental agreement produced as Ex.P10 was found to be inconsistent and unreliable, and the testimony of PW-1 disclosed that she was unaware of the contents of the rental agreement thereby rendering the alleged income arising out of the rent is untenable. Hence, the Tribunal, upon proper appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, has rightly rejected the exaggerated income claimed by the appellants and has correctly determined the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.13,500/- for the purpose of computing compensation. 12. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants and counsel for Respondent No.1. 13. In the present case there is no dispute regarding the liability. The same is admitted by both the parties. 14. The quantum is challenged under the heads “loss of dependency” and “loss of consortium”. 15. The Tribunal has awarded compensation as under: - 8 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 16. As regards ‘loss of dependency’ is concerned, the Tribunal has taken income of the deceased at Rs.11,250/-. The Pay Slip issued by the employer for the month of August 2017 shows that the deceased was earning Rs.14,371/- p.m, which is marked by the Tribunal as Ex.P14. But while considering the monthly income, it has taken Rs.11,250/-, which is on the lower side. Further, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court, the Tribunal committed an error in not adding 40% of future prospects to the monthly income without considering the principles laid down in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others (2017) 16 Sl. No. Particulars Amount 1 Loss of dependency Rs.18,90,000-00 2 Loss of Love and Affection Rs.30,000-00 3 Funeral and other expenses deceased Rs.20,000-00 4 Loss of consortium Rs.10,000-00 5 Loss of estate Rs.15,000-00 Total Rs.19,65,000-00 - 9 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 SCC 680. The Tribunal has failed to consider the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram & Others (2018) 18 SCC 130 and reiterated by the Division Bench of this Court in M.F.A.No.1100/2019 & connected matters disposed of on 12.06.2019 in awarding compensation towards ‘loss of consortium’. Thus, claimants are entitled to Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.40,000/- each x 3 family members) towards ‘loss of consortium’. As per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. reported in (2009 ACJ 1298), a multiplier of 14 has to be applied. Therefore, the claimants would be entitled to compensation towards ‘loss of dependency’ as under: Rs.14,371/- (40% = Rs.5,748/-) Rs.14,371+5,748= Rs.20,119/- Rs.20,119/- - 1/3 (Rs.6,706/-) = Rs.13,413/- Rs.13,413/- x 12 x 14 = Rs.22,53,384/- 17. As the deceased has three (03) family members, each of the dependants are entitled for a sum of Rs.40,000/- each. Therefore, a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- is awarded under the head ‘loss of consortium’. The compensation awarded under other heads are held to be just and reasonable. - 10 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 18. The appellants/claimants are entitled for compensation as under: Sl.No. Particulars Rs. 1 Loss of dependency Rs.22,53,384-00 2 Loss of Love and Affection Rs.30,000-00 3 Funeral and other expenses deceased Rs.20,000-00 4 Loss of consortium Rs.1,20,000-00 5 Loss of estate Rs.15,000-00 Total Rs.24,38,384-00 Thus, the claimant would be entitled to compensation of Rs.24,38,384/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realization. 19. Accordingly, the following Order is passed: i) Miscellaneous First Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.24,38,384/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realization. - 11 - MFA No. 4591 of 2019 iii) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. iv) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the Judgment passed by this Court forthwith. v) Apportionment of compensation shall be made as per the Award passed by the Tribunal. vi) Amount in deposit along with accrued interest if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal. Sd/- (DR.K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE BNV