- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26876 MFA No. 3695 of 2020 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3695 OF 2020(MV-D) C/W MFA CROSS OBJECTION NO. 100 OF 2024 (MV-D) IN MFA No. 3695/2020 BETWEEN: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 027. NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICES, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 027. …APPELLANT (BY SRI.S RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE NARAYANAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT POTHARAJANAHALLI VILLAGE BETHAMANGALA POST BANGARPET TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. GOPAL KRISHNA N, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26876 MFA No. 3695 of 2020 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100 of 2024 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 31.10.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.6410/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, PRL. MACT, CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MEMBER, PRL. MACT, BENGALURU SCCH-1, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.12,80,000 WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN MFA.CROB NO. 100/2024 BETWEEN: SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE NARAYANAPPA, NOW AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESIDING AT POTHARAJANAHALLI VILLAGE, BETHAMANGALA POST, BANGARAPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. GOPAL KRISHNA N, ADVOCATE) AND: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 027 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S. RAJASHEKAR, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA CROB IS FILED U/O.41 RULE 22 R/W SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.31.10.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.6410/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MEMBER, PRL. MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-1), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26876 MFA No. 3695 of 2020 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100 of 2024 THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT M.F.A.No.3695/2020 is preferred by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (for brevity, "the KSRTC") challenging the judgment and award dated 31.10.2018 passed in M.V.C.No.6410/2017 by the Court of Small Causes and Prl. M.A.C.T. at Bengaluru, whereby the Tribunal has allowed the claim petition filed by the claimant/appellant in M.F.A.CROB.No.100/2024 awarding a compensation of Rs.12,80,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. 2. M.F.A.CROB.No.100/2024 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 3. The factual matrix of the case is, on 01.08.2017 at about 9:30 p.m., when Sri Venkatapathi N., (deceased - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26876 MFA No. 3695 of 2020 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100 of 2024 in this case) was riding motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-08/Q-8839 near Prasad Reddy Saw Mill on Bethamangala - V.Kote road, Bangarapet Taluk, the driver of KSRTC bus bearing Registration No.KA-07/F-1325 came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motorbike of Sri Venkatapathi N. As a result, he fell down and sustained severe injuries and succumbed to the injuries on the spot. Thereafter, FIR came to be registered against the driver of the KSRTC bus and charge sheet was laid against him. Later, a claim petition was filed by the legal representatives of the deceased. 4. The Tribunal, on assessment of oral and documentary evidence placed before it, allowed the claim petition as stated supra. Being aggrieved by the same, the KSRTC, challenging the liability and the claimant has preferred the appeal for enhancement of compensation. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26876 MFA No. 3695 of 2020 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100 of 2024 5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants in M.F.A.No.3695/2020, so also the learned counsel for the appellant in M.F.A.CROB.No.100/2024. 6. Apart from urging several contention, the learned counsel for the appellant/KSRTC primarily contended that, the driver of the KSRTC bus was not responsible for the accident in question. According to her, the driver of the bus was on a scheduled trip on Mulbagal to KGF and when the bus came near Prasad Reddy Saw Mill on Bethamangala-V.Kote road, Bangarapet, the deceased came from opposite direction from right side of the bus without wearing helmet and without following the traffic rules. At the same time, on that road itself, the driver of the stationed Eicher lorry opened its front door without any instruction and indication, which hit on the head of the deceased, as a result, the deceased fell down on the road. Thereafter, the right wheel of the KSRTC bus passed on him. As such, he died on spot and there is no - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26876 MFA No. 3695 of 2020 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100 of 2024 negligence on the part of the driver of KSRTC bus. Accordingly, she prays to set aside the judgment. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimant contended that the chargesheet has been laid against the driver of the KSRTC bus and there is no such mention in respect of the driver of the stationed Eicher lorry opening the door and as a result the accident was caused. Moreover, the driver of the KSRTC bus has not challenged the chargesheet filed against him. In such circumstances, she submits that the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant/KSRTC is liable to be rejected. Accordingly, she prays to dismiss the appeal filed by the KSRTC and to allow the MFA.CROB and to enhance the compensation. 8. I have given my anxious consideration both on the submission made by the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the evidence and documents placed on record. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26876 MFA No. 3695 of 2020 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100 of 2024 9. As could be gathered from records, the accident in question and the coverage of the insurance policy is not in dispute. Though it is contended by the learned counsel for the KSRTC that the accident was caused due to unavoidable circumstance i.e., the driver of the stationed Eicher lorry suddenly opened the right door. As a result, the same was hit on the head of the deceased, due to which, he fell on the road and the KSRTC bus passed on him. To substantiate said contention, there is no such evidence available on record except the contention taken by the learned counsel for the KSRTC before the Tribunal. 10. On perusal of Ex.P6 - chargesheet, the same depicts that due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of KSRTC bus, the accident in question was caused. There is no mention about the stationed Eicher lorry or opening of its door by the driver of the same. 11. In such circumstance, I am of the view that the Tribunal rightly held the liability against the driver of the KSRTC bus and directed the KSRTC to pay the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26876 MFA No. 3695 of 2020 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100 of 2024 compensation. I find no good ground to interfere with the view taken by the Tribunal. Accordingly, the M.F.A.No.3695/2020 is dismissed. 12. As regards the appeal filed by the claimant in M.F.A.CROB.No.100/2024 is concerned, the Tribunal awarded Rs.12,80,000/- as compensation to the claimant. 13. In order to arrive at the loss of dependency, the Tribunal has determined the monthly income, notionally at Rs.9,000/- p.m. As there is no credible evidence to ascertain the actual monthly income, it would be appropriate and prudent to adopt the monthly income determined by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, which, for the accident of the year 2017, would be Rs.11,000/-. 14. Since the deceased was aged 32 years and was working as driver, 40% requires to be added to the monthly income towards future prospects, which would result in the income to be Rs.15,400/-. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26876 MFA No. 3695 of 2020 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100 of 2024 15. Since the deceased was bachelor at the time of accident 50% of his income has to be deducted towards his personal expenses. The income for the calculation of loss of dependency would be Rs.7,700/- (15,400 - 50%). 16. As the deceased was aged 32 years, a multiplier of '16' would have to be applied. 17. Consequently, the claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.14,78,400/- (7,700 x 12 x 16) towards “loss of dependency”. 18. The claimant being the mother of the deceased, she would be entitled to a sum of Rs.48,000/- towards “loss of consortium” and she would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.36,000/- under the “conventional heads”. 19. Thus, the claimant, in modification of the impugned award, would be entitled to the following sums: Sl. No. Particulars Amount (In Rs.) 1. Loss of Dependency 14,78,400 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26876 MFA No. 3695 of 2020 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100 of 2024 2. Loss of Consortium 48,000 3. Conventional Heads 36,000 Total 15,62,400/- 20. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for compensation of Rs.15,62,400/- as against Rs.12,80,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. M.F.A.CROB.No.100/2024 is allowed in part. 21. The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the Tribunal. It is made clear that, the claimant is not entitled for interest for the delayed period. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 41