Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21426 (KAR)

JAVARAIAH v. SHASHIKALA K

MFA/3466/2022 · 2026-06-12

Rajesh Rai K

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28705 MFA No. 3466 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3466 OF 2022(MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. JAVARAIAH S/O LATE BUNDAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS 2. GIRIJA W/O RAJANNA AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 3. CHANDRAMMA W/O KUMARA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS 4. ASHWINI W/O RAJESH AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS 5. RANJITHA D/O JAVARAIAH AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS ALL ARE R/OF DEPURA VILLAGE KONASOOR POST, BETTADAPURA HOBLI PERIYAPATNA TALUK - 571 102 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SUMA K, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28705 MFA No. 3466 of 2022 AND: 1. SHASHIKALA K W/O JAYARAMA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/O NO.291/2 6TH MAIN, II STAGE, VIJAYANAGAR MYSURU - 570 017 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED DIVISIONAL OFFICE NO.II, TP HUB NO.2912, SRI VENKATESHWARA 2 MVC 759/2019 PLAZA I MAIN, SARASWATHIPURAM MYSURU - 570 009 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2, R2 IS SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.05.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.759/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The appeal is filed seeking enhancement of compensation. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28705 MFA No. 3466 of 2022 2. It is not in dispute that as a result of the motor vehicle accident, which occurred on 19.05.2019, Rani @ Ranamma, a 48 year old died. 3. It is not in dispute that the Insurer is liable to pay the compensation as the offending vehicle was insured. 4. The Tribunal, on assessment of the evidence adduced before it, has come to the conclusion that the driver of the offending vehicle was responsible for the accident which has resulted in the death of Rani @ Ranamma. The Tribunal has thereafter proceeded to award the following sums as compensation: Sl. No. Particulars Amount in (Rs.) 1. Loss of Dependency 10,40,052 2. Funeral expenses & Transportation charges 15,000 3. Loss of estate 15,000 4. Loss of love and affection 25,000 5. Filial Consortium 40,000 Total 11,35,052 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28705 MFA No. 3466 of 2022 5. In order to arrive at the loss of dependency, the Tribunal has determined the monthly income, notionally at Rs.8,000/- 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 2019, would be Rs.14,000/-. 6. Since the deceased was aged 48 years, 25% requires to be added to the monthly income towards future prospects, which would result in the income to be Rs.17,500/-. 7. The Tribunal has held that since three daughters of the deceased were married, they cannot be treated as dependents and therefore, the husband and unmarried daughter of the deceased could only be treated as dependants and accordingly, 1/3rd was deducted towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased while computing the loss of dependency. In my view, the said finding is just and appropriate. As such, applying the multiplier of '13' since the deceased was aged 48 years, the loss of dependency would be Rs.18,20,052/- (Rs.17,500 - 1/3 X 12 X 13). Thus, the claimant would be entitled to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28705 MFA No. 3466 of 2022 Rs.18,20,052/- towards loss of dependency as against Rs.10,40,052/- as awarded by the Tribunal. 8. The claimants being the husband and daughters, they would each be entitled to a sum of Rs.48,400/- towards “loss of consortium” i.e., in all Rs.2,42,000/- and they would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.36,300/- under the “conventional heads”. 9. Thus, the claimants, in modification of the impugned award, would be entitled to the following sums: Sl. No. Particulars Amount (In Rs.) 1. Loss of Dependency 18,20,052 2. Loss of Consortium 2,42,000 3. Conventional Heads 36,300/- Total 20,98,352 10. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for compensation of Rs.20,98,352/- as against Rs.11,35,052/- awarded by the Tribunal, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28705 MFA No. 3466 of 2022 11. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. 12. The apportionment of compensation amount shall be in terms of the award of the Tribunal. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18