- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28153 MFA No. 1664 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1664 OF 2022 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SHWETHA PRAKASH KAMBALE D/O LATE B.K.PRAKASH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/O SANTHE MAIDANA, SHIVAJI COLONY, ARSIKERE TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 103, PRESENTLY R/AT KYTHNOU 25, GLYFADA, ATHENS, GREECE-16674. REP. BY GPA HOLDER A3 2. SHRUTHI PRAKASH KAMBALE D/O LATE B.K.PRAKASH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O SANTHE MAIDANA, SHIVAJI COLONY, ARSIKERE TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 103, REP. BY GPA HOLDER A3 PRESENTLY R/AT NO.703, STREAMLIGHT TOWER, 9TH PROVINCE LONDON, E149DW. 3. SHILPA PRAKASH KAMBALE D/O LATE B.K.PRAKASH KUMAR, Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28153 MFA No. 1664 of 2022 AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O SANTHE MAIDANA, SHIVAJI COLONY, ARSIKERE TOWN, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 103. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. K R LINGARAJU, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. K. T. RAJASHEKAR PROPRIETOR SRS TRAVELS, NO.270, M.M. ADIGAL SALAI, PANDUCHERI, PANDUCHERI STATE, PIN - 605 001. 2. THE MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.40, LAKSHMI COMPLEX, K.R. ROAD, OPPOSITE VANI VILAS HOSPITAL, POST BOX NO.96, CHANDANA COMPLEX, HARSHAMAHAL ROAD, HASSAN - 573 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ANANDA K S, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. ASHOK N PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.02.11.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.514/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AMACT, ARSIKERE, BY ALLOWING THE PRESENT APPEAL, ETC THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28153 MFA No. 1664 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal dated 02.11.2019, in MVC.No.514/2018 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Arsikere (for short ‘Tribunal’). 2. The date of accident, involvement of vehicle, death of Smt.Alka and liability to pay the compensation are not in dispute. The only dispute involved in this appeal is regarding the quantum of compensation. 3. Heard Sri.K.R.Lingaraju, Learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Sri Ashok N. Patil, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 - Insurance Company. 4. Sri.K.R.Lingaraju, learned counsel for the appellant, vehemently contended that the Tribunal erred in considering the income of the deceased as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28153 MFA No. 1664 of 2022 (for short ‘KSLSA’) for the year 2017. Drawing this Court's attention to the Tribunal's judgment, he has submitted that while the Tribunal applied the correct multiplier, it erroneously assessed the income at Rs.8,500/- per month, contrary to the income of Rs.11,000/- per month for unskilled laborers as per chart supra. Further, he argued that the Tribunal failed to award appropriate compensation under the head of filial consortium, disregarding the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. NANU RAM. On these grounds, he prayed for allowing the appeal by proper determination of compensation under both heads. 5. Refuting the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant Sri.Ashok N. Patil, with all vehemence contended that the appellant being housewife and in the absence of proof of income the Tribunal has properly considered the monthly income at the rate of Rs.8,500/- and deducted 50% and applied appropriate multiplier in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28153 MFA No. 1664 of 2022 granting the compensation. Further, submitted that as the compensation granted by the Tribunal is adequate and justified, no interference is warranted at the hands of this Court and sought to dismiss the appeal. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the only point which arises for consideration is: “Whether the Tribunal was justified in awarding the compensation and if not, whether the appellants have made out a case for enhancement of compensation?” 7. My answer to the above point for consideration is ‘partly in affirmative’, for the following reasons: Admittedly, the accident occurred on 27.09.2017. As per the income fixed by the KSLSA for the year 2017 is Rs.11,000/- per month. The deceased was 58 years old and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD VS - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28153 MFA No. 1664 of 2022 PRANAY SETHI1, 10% income is added towards ‘future prospects’ and in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED V. NANU RAM & OTHERS2 the claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.40,000/- each under the head ‘Loss Of Consortium’. In view of the settled position of law and the income fixed as per the KSLSA, the Tribunal is not justified in awarding compensation against the settled position of law as well as, the income fixed by the KSLSA. In view of the same, the judgment and award of the Tribunal requires interference. Therefore, the compensation under the head ‘Loss Of Dependency’ is recalculated and quantified as follows: Rs.11,000 + 10% x 12 x 9 X 50% = Rs.6,53,400/- 8. In view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. 1 2017 (16) SCC 680 2 2018 ACJ 2782 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28153 MFA No. 1664 of 2022 LIMITED V. NANU RAM & OTHERS3 and in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. PRANAY SETHI4, the claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 3) under the head ‘Loss Of Consortium’. 9. Further, a compensation of Rs.15,000/- and Rs.15,000/- is awarded under the head ‘Funeral And Transportation’ and ‘Loss Of Estate’ respectively. 10. Further, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of RASMITA BISWAL & OTHERS VS. DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER5, there shall be an enhancement of 10% on the conventional heads for every three years. Taking into consideration the same, the compensation awarded towards ‘loss of consortium’, being Rs.1,20,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 3), the escalation at 3 2018 ACJ 2782 4 (2017) 16 SCC 680 5 (2022) 2 SC 767 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28153 MFA No. 1664 of 2022 10%+10% works out to Rs.24,000/-. Accordingly, the appellants / claimants are entitled for a sum of Rs.1,44,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 3 + 20%) towards ‘Loss Of Consortium’ including Loss Of Love And Affection’, along with 10% + 10% escalation towards ‘Loss Of Estate’ And ‘Funeral And Transportation’. Therefore, Rs.36,000/- (Rs.15,000 + 15,000 + 10% + 10%) is awarded. 11. Thus, in all the appellants/claimants are entitled for enhanced compensation as follows: Loss Dependency (11,000+10%x12x9 x 50%) : Rs. 6,53,400/- Filial consortium (40,000 x 3 + 20%) : Rs. 1,44,000/- Loss of Estate (Rs.15,000 + 20%) : Rs. 18,000/- Loss of funeral expenses and transportation body (Rs.15,000 + 20%) : Rs. 18,000/- TOTAL : Rs. 8,33,400/- - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28153 MFA No. 1664 of 2022 12. On redetermination the appellants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.8,33,400/- as against Rs.5,49,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation works out to be Rs.2,84,400/- (Rs.8,33,400 – Rs.5,49,000/-). The enhanced amount shall carry with the interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. 13. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is Allowed-In-Part; ii) The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal dated 02.11.2019, in MVC.No.514/2018, passed by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Arisikere is modified; iii) The appellants – claimants are entitled for an enhanced compensation of Rs.2,84,400/- (Rs.8,33,400 – Rs.5,49,000/-) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization; - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28153 MFA No. 1664 of 2022 iv) The respondent No.2 – Insurance Company shall deposit enhanced compensation along with 6% interest from the date of petition till realization before the concerned Tribunal within eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. v) Disbursement as well as apportionment of the compensation amount shall be as per the impugned order of the Tribunal. vi) No order as to cost. Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE TIN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1