- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K M.F.A. NO. 3808 OF 2023 (MV-D) C/W M.F.A. NO. 1203 OF 2024 (MV-D) IN MFA NO. 3808/2023 BETWEEN: M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED MOTOR CLAIMS HUB, NO.28, 4TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, EAST WING, NEAR CITI BANK, M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 NOW REP. BY MANAGER LEGAL. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ASHOK N PATIL, ADV.) AND: 1. SMT. RADHA W/O LATE MAHADESHCHARI, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, 2. M.SUNITHA D/O LATE. MAHADESHCHARI, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, 3. M. CHAITRA D/O LATE MAHADESHCHARI, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 4. SMT. VARALAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE SUBBACHARI, AGED ABOUT 93 YEARS, ALL ARE R/AT NO.90, 6TH CROSS, KUVEMPU LAYOUT, DEVASANDRA, KRISHNARAJAPURA, BENGALURU-560036. 5. S. VIRUPAKSHA S/O R. SURYANARAYANA, NO.1026/A, 12TH CROSS, 2ND MAIN ROAD, M.C.LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGARA, BENGALURU-560040. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K. T., ADV. FOR R1-R3 R4 & R5 – SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.02.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.561/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXIV ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU, THE AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.66,91,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN MFA NO. 1203/2024 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. RADHA W/O LATE MAHADESHCHARI, AGED ABOUT 45 YEAR 2. M SUNITHA D/O LATE MAHADESHCHARI, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS 3. M CHAITRA D/O LATE MAHADESHCHARI, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS R/AT NO. 90, 6TH CROSS, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 SMT. VARALAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE SUBBACHARI DIED ON 18.05.2023 SUBSEQUENT TO THE JUDGMENT OF THE CLAIMS TRIBUNAL. HENCE, NOT MADE AS THE PARTY, THE PRESENT APPELLANTS MAY BE TREATED AS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE’S OF DECEASED. ALL ARE R/AT NO.90, 6TH CROSS, KUVEMPU LAYOUT, DEVASANDRA, KRISHNARAJAPURA BENGALURU – 560036. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K. T., ADV.) AND: 1. M/S. RELIANCE GIC LTD., BY ITS MANAGER, MOTOR CLAIMS HUB NO.28, 4TH FLOOR CENTENARY BUILDING EAST WING, NEAR CITI BANK, M G ROAD, BANGALORE-560001. 2. S VIRUPAKSHA S/O R SURYANARAYANA NO.1026/A, 12TH CROSS 2ND MAIN ROAD, M C LAYOUT, VIJAYANAGAR BENGALURU -560040. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK N PATIL, ADV. FOR R1 V/O DATED 08.07.2025 NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.02.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.561/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL MALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXIV ACMM, MEMBER, MAYO HALL UNIT, MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-20), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The above two appeals filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is directed against the judgment and award dated 22.02.2023 in MVC No.561/2021 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mayo Hall Unit, Bangalore (for short “the Tribunal”) 2. MFA No.3808/2023 is filed by the Insurer questioning the non- consideration of contributory negligence as well as quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in favour of the claimants whereas MFA No.1203/2024 is by the claimants, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation praying for enhancement of compensation. 3. The brief facts of the case are that: The claimants are the wife, children and mother of the deceased one S.Mahadeshachari who died in a road traffic - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 accident that occurred on 02.01.2021 involving a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-53/HC-7233 and Bolero Pick up van bearing registration No.KA-02/AH-0234. It is stated that the deceased was aged about 54 years and was earning a sum of Rs.80,000/- p.m. by doing technical work. 4. On issuance of notice, respondent No.1 appeared before the Tribunal and filed its written statement contending that there is delay in lodging the complaint; there is contributory negligence on the part of the rider of the motorcycle and also contended that the claimants were not dependants of the deceased. Thus, prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. However, respondent No.2 remained exparte. 5. Before the Tribunal, claimant No.1, wife of the deceased got examined herself as P.W.1 apart from examining one more witness as P.W.2 and got marked the documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P26. On behalf of the respondents, an officer of the Insurance Company was examined as R.W.1 and got marked the documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R3. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 6. The Tribunal, on appreciation of material on record awarded total compensation of Rs,66,91,000/- on the following heads: 1. Loss of dependency :: Rs.65,00,890/- 2. Loss of estate :: Rs. 15,000/- 3. Towards funeral and Obsequies ceremonies :: Rs. 15,000/- 4. Loss of consortium :: Rs. 1,60,000/- ------------------ Total :: Rs.66,91,000/- ------------------ While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal determined the income of the deceased at Rs.64,041/- p.m. added 15% towards future prospects and awarded compensation on the conventional heads. The Insurer is in appeal, questioning non-consideration of contributory negligence and also questioning the quantum of compensation whereas the claimants are in appeal, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation and praying for enhancement of compensation. 7. Learned counsel Sri.Ashok N Patil would contend that the Tribunal failed to consider the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased, rider of the motorcycle. It is submitted that the deceased was riding the motorcycle to enter the main - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 road while the insured vehicle was coming from T.C.Palya. It is his contention that in terms of Regulations 8 and 9 of the Rules of Road Regulations, 1989 it was the responsibility of the deceased rider of the motorcycle to give way to the vehicle which was coming on the main road. Further, learned counsel would submit that the sketch of the accident would indicate that the accident occurred on the middle of the road that too in the night at 10.30 p.m. and the rider of the motorcycle ought to have been more cautious at the said time of the accident. As the deceased rider of the motorcycle was not cautious, due to his negligence the accident occurred. Thus, he would pray for consideration of contributory negligence on the part of the rider of the motorcycle. 8. Nextly, learned counsel Sri.Patil for appellant-Insurance Company contended that the Tribunal committed grave error in adding 15% of the assessed income towards future prospects as the deceased was not in permanent employment. Learned counsel would submit that the claimants may be entitled to 10% of the assessed income towards future prospects and not - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 15%. Thus, he would pray for modification of the judgment and award under appeal. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel Sri.K.T.Gurudev Prasad for respondents-claimants would contend that the rider of the motorcycle i.e., deceased entered the main road and the width of the road was 38 feet, as such driver of the Bolero Pick up van, which is insured with the appellant-insurance company ought to have been more cautious and it was the responsibility of the driver of the Bolero to proceed with caution at the intersection. It is also the submission of the learned counsel for claimants that charge sheet is filed against the driver of the Bolero Pick up van and the insurance company has not proved their contention, that the accident occurred due to negligence of the deceased-rider of the motorcycle. Having failed to examine the driver of the Bolero Pick up van and in the absence of any other evidence on the part of the insurance company to prove the contention that accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased-rider of the motorcycle, the Tribunal is justified in saddling the entire liability on the appellant-insurer. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 10. Further learned counsel Sri.K.T.Gurudev Prasad, would support awarding of 15% of income towards future prospectus by submitting that deceased was in permanent employment in a private limited company, thus, he prays for rejecting the said contention. However, learned counsel would submit that the claimants would be entitled for 10% enhancement of the compensation awarded on conventional heads. Thus, he would also pray for modifying the compensation by allowing the claimants appeal. 11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire material on records, the following points would arise for consideration: 1) Whether the insurer proves contributory negligence on the part of the rider of the motorcycle i.e., the deceased ? 2) Whether the claimants would prove that they would be entitled for enhancement of compensation ? 12. Answer to the above points would be in the 'negative' for the following reasons: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 The accident that occurred on 02.01.2021 involving motorcycle bearing No.KA-53/HC-7233 and Bolero Pick up van bearing No.KA-02/AH-0234 and the accidental death of Mahadeshachari, husband of claimant No.1 is not in dispute in this appeal. The insurer is in appeal aggrieved by non- consideration of contributory negligence on the part of the deceased, whereas the claimants are in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 13. Learned counsel for the appellant-insurer contended that the accident occurred solely due to the negligence of the rider of the motorcycle i.e., the deceased. However, we are not inclined to accept the said contention on going through the records particularly Ex.P5 - spot sketch of the accident. Ex.P5 would indicate that the road width is about 38 feet and the accident has taken place on the middle of the road. The deceased rider of the motorcycle came from K.R.Puram side and while Bolero Pick up van was coming from T.C.Palya side. The rider of the motorcycle took right and Bolero Pick up van was coming from T.C.Palya and the accident took place on the middle of the intersection. The driver of the Bolero pick up Van - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 had sufficient time to notice oncoming motorcycle though it was at 10.30 pm in the night. It is not the case of the appellant- insurance company that the motorcycle was coming without headlight. Moreover charge sheet is filed against the driver of the Bolero pick up van and the insurer has not produced any material evidence to prove their contention either by examining the driver of the Bolero Pick up van or placing any other material. Thus, we reject the contention of contributory negligence on the part of the deceased-rider of the motorcycle. 14. We find some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant-insurer that Tribunal committed an error in adding 15% of the assessed income towards future prospectus instead of 10%. Admittedly, the deceased was aged 54 years and was working in a private company and according to the learned counsel for the appellant said job was terminable at any time. Admittedly it is not a permanent employment and as such, the Tribunal was not right or justified in adding 15% of the assessed income towards future prospectus. Thus, we hold that the claimants would be entitled to addition of 10% of the assessed income towards future - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 prospectus. Insofar as the quantification of loss of dependency is concerned, the Tribunal has erred in deducting income tax from the net salary calculated rather than the gross salary. The Net Annual Income of the deceased after deduction of income tax and professional tax is thus arrived at Rs.6,99,894/- (7,68,492 - 68,598). Hence, the compensation under the head ‘loss of dependency is modified as under: 6,99,894+10%-1/4th X11= Rs. 63,51,534/-. 15. Learned counsel for the claimants contended that the claimants would be entitled for 10% enhancement on the compensation awarded on the conventional heads, which we accept and award 10% enhanced compensation on conventional heads in terms of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. PRANAY SETHI & OTHERS reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157. Thus, the claimants shall be entitled for the following modified compensation: Sl. No. PARTICULARS AMOUNT 1. Loss of Dependency Rs. 63,51,534/- 2. Loss of Consortium Rs. 1,76,000/- 3. Loss of Estate Rs. 16,500/- - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 4. Funeral Expenses and Transportation Charges Rs. 16,500/- TOTAL Rs. 65,60,534/- 16. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to the compensation of Rs. 65,60,534/- as against Rs. Rs.66,91,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. In the result, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER a) MFA No. 1203/2024 and MFA No. 3808/2023 are partly allowed. b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified holding that the claimants would be entitled to the compensation of Rs. 65,60,534/- as against Rs. Rs.66,91,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The entire compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:27597-DB MFA No. 3808 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 1203 of 2024 d) The insurance company shall deposit the entire compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. e) Apportionment, deposit and disbursement shall be made as per the award of the Tribunal. f) The amount in deposit, if any, be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith along with Trial Court Records. g) Draw modified award accordingly. SD/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE MPK/GPG CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36