- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4927 OF 2017 (MV-D) C/W MFA CROSS OBJECTION NO. 167 OF 2022 (MV-D) IN MFA No. 4927/2017: BETWEEN: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR A.P.S.R.T.C KUPPAM DEPOT REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR A.P.S.R.T.C, MUSHIRABAD HYDERABAD. …APPELLANT (BY SRI D. VIJAYAKUMAR, ADV.) AND: 1a. 1b. 1c. SRI ASHOK DEAD BY HIS LRs DIED ON 24.07.2018. SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O LATE ASHOK AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS. RAKESH S/O LATE ASHOK AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS. KISHORE S/O LATE ASHOK AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS. ALL ARE R/AT SIDDANAHALLI - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 VILLAGE, BANGARPET TLAUK KOLAR DIST - 563 115. 2. SMT. SUMITHRAMMA W/O C. NARAYANASWAMY D/O LATE KRISHNAPPA MAJOR R/AT LAKSHMISAGARA VILLAGE GATTAMADAMANGALA POST BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DIST - 563 113. 3. SMT. KALAVATHY W/O KRISHNAPPA D/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/AT LUKKANAHALLI KOLAR TALUK KOLAR DIST - 563 130. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI K. VISHWANATHA, ADV., FOR R-3; SRI N.R. RAGAVENDRA, ADV., FOR PROPOSED LRs OF R-1 i.e., R-1(A TO C) & R-2; R-1(B & C) ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY R-1(A) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED07.02.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.131/2013 ON THE FILE OF III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, KOLAR, (SITTING AT K.G.F.), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.2,64,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM 22.06.2013. IN MFA.CROB NO. 167/2022: BETWEEN: SMT. KALAVATHY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS W/O KRISHNAPPA D/O LATE KRISHNAPPA R/AT LUKKANAHALLI KOLAR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 130. ...PETITIONER - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 (BY SRI VISHWANATHA K, ADV.) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR A.P.S.R.T.C KUPPAM DEPOT REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR A.P.S.R.T.C. MUSHIRABAD, HYDERABAD. 2. ASHOK DIED ON 24-7-2018 BY HIS LRS SMT. GOWRAMMA W/O LATE ASHOK AGED 35 YEARS. 3. RAKESH S/O LATE ASHOK AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS. 4. KISHORE S/O LATE ASHOK AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS. THE RESPONDENT NO.3 AND 4 ARE MINORS, REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER SMT. GOWRAMMA, THE RESPONDENT NO.2 HEREIN. R/AT SIDDANAHALLI VILLAGE SULIKUNTE POST BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT -563 114. 5. SMT. SUMITHRAMMA W/O C. NARAYANASWAMY D/O LATE KRISHNAPPA R/O LAKSHMISGARA VILLAGE GATTAMADAMANGALA POST - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 563 113.W ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI D. VIJAYAKUMAR, ADV., FOR R-1; SRI N.R. RAGHAVENDRA, ADV., FOR R-2 TO R-5) THIS MFA CROB IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 R/W SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.02.2017 PASSED IN MVC.NO.131/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, MACT, KOLAR (SITTING AT KGF), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,64,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM 22.06.2013 TILL DEPOSIT. THIS MFA AND MFA CROB, 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.131/2013 dated 07.02.2017 passed by the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Kolar (sitting at KGF), the Managing Director, APSRTC, is before this Court in MFA No.4927/2017 and the claimant is before this Court in MFA Crob No.167/2022. 2. The facts of the case are, the deceased was proceeding on 19.03.2012 on his motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-04/Q- 6673 towards Bangarpet and at 07.00 p.m., when his motorcycle was proceeding on the road between Chikkahasala- Dimba Village gate, it was proceeding on the left side of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 road slowly and by observing all traffic rules and at that time, driver of the APSRTC bus bearing No.AP-28-Z/1574 drove the bus in the opposite direction with high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed the motorcycle and due to the impact, he sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the same. The police have registered a case against driver of the APSRTC bus and he was charge sheeted. It is the case of the claimants that they are the son and daughters. 3. It is the case of the claimants that they are depending upon the father and he was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. The Tribunal has held that the accident had taken place because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the APSRTC bus. While coming to the said conclusion, the Tribunal has observed that as per the evidence of the driver, he was driving the bus when the accident had taken place and crime was registered and charge sheet is filed, which is pending consideration and he has not filed separate complaint either to the police or before the Court alleging that the accident took place due to rash and negligent act of the deceased. The Tribunal basing on this, has come to the conclusion that the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 accident had taken place because of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the APSRTC bus. With regard to the compensation, the age of the deceased was taken as 48 years and the income was taken at Rs.4,500/- and granted the compensation. 4. The Tribunal, basing on the evidence, had granted the compensation as per the table given below: SL. No. Heads Compensation Awarded 1. Loss of Estate : Rs. 54,000/- x 1/3 x 13 = 2,34,000/- 2. Conventional Heads i.e., Loss of love and affection, transportation of dead boy and funeral expenses : Rs. 30,000/- Total Rs. 2,64,000.00 5. Learned counsel for the APSRTC submits that the Tribunal has fixed the liability on the driver of the bus when the deceased has come in the wrong way and entered into the highway and because of his negligence, the accident had taken place. This aspect was not considered by the Tribunal. It is submitted that as per the Aadhaar card, other documents and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 charge sheet, the age of the deceased is shown as 59 years but the Tribunal has taken the age of the deceased as 48 years. It is further submitted that MFA No.4927/2017 is filed in the year 2017 and having received the compensation amount, the claimants cannot file the cross objection in the year 2022 and the same is barred by limitation and cannot be entertained. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents/claimants submits that son is no more and his legal representatives are already brought on record. Both, the son and the daughters were depending upon the father. It is submitted that the accident has taken place in the year 2012. It is their case that the deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month but the Tribunal has taken his earnings at Rs.4,500/- per month. The Tribunal ought to have taken at least Rs.7,000/- as income. It is submitted that when the Post Mortem Report reveals the age of the deceased as 45 years, the Court ought to have taken the said age into consideration. He submits that with regard to the negligence, the APSRTC has not adduced any evidence and the evidence on record i.e., the police records clearly shows that the negligence is on the part of the driver of the APSRTC bus. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 He submits that there are no grounds to interfere insofar as the negligence aspect is concerned. He submits that even under conventional heads, the amount that is granted by the Tribunal is not reasonable and it needs to be enhanced. 7. Having heard the learned counsel on either side, perused the entire material on record. 8. Firstly, with regard to the aspect of negligence, as rightly argued by learned counsel for the respondents/claimants, except the grounds that are taken, no evidence is adduced by the APSRTC in this regard. The police records are against the driver of the appellant/APSRTC. Under these circumstances, there is no other material for this Court to come to conclusion that the deceased was negligent. Hence, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the award passed by the Tribunal on the aforesaid aspect. 9. Secondly, with regard to the age of the deceased, according to learned counsel for the appellant/APSRTC, the age of the deceased should have been taken as 59 years. In the cases where there is a discrepancies in respect of the age of - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 illiterate persons and different ages are shown in different documents, in the case of death, the Tribunal will necessarily look at the Post Mortem Report. In the Post Mortem report, the age of the deceased is shown as 45 years. Hence, this Court is inclined to take the age of the deceased as 45 years. 10. Then, with regard to the income of the deceased, as the accident has taken place in the year 2012 and there is no evidence that the deceased was earning Rs.25,000/- per month, the Tribunal ought to have taken at least Rs.7,000/- per month as the income of the deceased. Therefore, this Court is taking the income of the deceased at Rs.7,000/- per month. The future prospects at 25% has to be added and the same would come to an amount of Rs.8,750/- (Rs.7,000/-+ Rs.1750/-) As there are three dependents, 2/3rd has to be deducted towards the personal expenses i.e., Rs.2,917/-. The contribution to the family would be an amount of Rs.5,834/- per month. Hence, loss of dependency would come to an amount of Rs.9,80,112/- (Rs.5,834 x 12 x 14). Towards loss of consortium, this Court is granting an amount of - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 Rs.96,000/- (Rs.48,000x2) is granted. Towards funeral expenses, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.36,000/-. 11. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala vs. M. Malathi and Another - (2014) 11 SCC 178, the claimants are entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. 12. The claimants are therefore, entitled to the compensation under the following heads: SL. No. Heads Compensation Awarded by Tribunal Compensation Awarded by this Court 1. Loss of Estate Rs. 2,34,000/- 00/- 2. Conventional Heads i.e., Loss of love and affection, transportation of dead boy and funeral expenses Rs. 30,000/- 00/- 3. Loss of dependency Rs. 00/ 9,80,112/- 4. Loss of consortium Rs. 00/ 96,000/- 5. Funeral Expenses Rs. 00/ 36,000/- - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 6. Legal Expenses Rs. 00/ 10,000/- TOTAL Rs. 2,64,000/- 11,22,112/- 13. Altogether, the claimants are entitled for compensation of an amount of Rs.11,22,112/-. 14. Accordingly, MFA.No.4927/2017 filed by the APSRTC is dismissed. 15. Accordingly, MFA Crob.No.167/2022 is allowed by enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.2,64,000/- to Rs.11,22,112/-. The APSRTC is liable to pay the compensation. i. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. ii. The APSRTC shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimants are entitled to withdraw the entire amount. iii. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20079 MFA No. 4927 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 167 of 2022 the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. iv. The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Tribunal. The compensation that is awarded to the claimant/son, shall be apportioned to his legal representatives. v. No costs. vi. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE DN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 2