- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29738 MFA No. 3614 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3614 OF 2016 (MV-D) BETWEEN: THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD SRI RAM ARCADE OPP. MAIN POST OFFICE ROAD, UDUPI REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTED AT REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.144, SHUBHARAM COMPLEX M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. APPELLANT (BY SRI. SRISHAILA S .,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEEPA SHETTY AGED 32 YRS W/O LATE PRASHANTH SHETTY 2. YATHEENDRA SHETTY AGED 74 YRS S/O LATE SUBBAYYA SHETTY 3. VARIJA Y SHETTY AGED 62 YRS W/O YATHEENDRA SHETTY ALL ARE R/AT GUDDEMAR HOUSE, DERLAKATTE POST, BELMA VILLAGE, MANGALORE TALUK. Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29738 MFA No. 3614 of 2016 4. J.KRISHNA PALEMAR AGED 54 YRS S/O LATE MALLAPPA M/S LAND LINKS NO.9, CITY POINT, KODIALBAIL MANGALORE. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NISHIT KUMAR SHETTY.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3; SRI. AVISH ACHARYA., ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 08.02.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.648/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT-III, D.K., MANGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.14,30,250/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION AND ETC,. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the insurance company under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 08.02.2016 passed in MVC.No.648/2010 on the file of the learned II Additional - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29738 MFA No. 3614 of 2016 District Judge and III Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mangalore, D.K, seeking for reduction of compensation. 2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondents. The ranks of the parties are retained as per the Tribunal for the sake of convenience. 3. One Prashanth Shetty, has met with accident on 01.04.2007 and died subsequently. His wife and parents filed the claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record has awarded an amount of Rs.14,30,250/-. But fixed the negligence on the driver of the tipper lorry as 75% and that of the jeep driver as 25%. Aggrieved by the said order, the Insurance company has preferred this appeal and mainly contended that the deceased was an agriculturist and also working as a marble contractor and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. But he has not produced either RTC or IT records or contractor license to prove his occupation and income. But the Tribunal had erred in taking his income as Rs.12,000/- per month without any basis. The Tribunal has granted Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of consortium, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29738 MFA No. 3614 of 2016 Rs.1,00,000/- towards love and affection and Rs.50,000/- towards loss of estate which are excessive. Therefore, this appeal is filed for reduction of the compensation. 4. The manner of accident shows that while Prashanth Shetty, was proceeding on his motorcycle and reached opposite to Kaleel Chicken Center of Belma Village on the Konaje- Thokkottu road, the tipper lorry bearing No. KA-19A-4818 came in rash and negligent manner and dashed the motorcycle bearing No.KA-19-V-4213 as a result, he was thrown away on the tar road. The front left wheel of the tipper lorry ran over on his lower body and he sustained grievous injuries. But after the investigation charge sheet is also filed against the driver of the jeep bearing No.CRX-1160 and it is stated that due rash and negligent driving of the jeep the accident took place. The claimants filed claim petition only against the owner and insurer of the tipper lorry. Charge sheet is against both drivers of jeep and the tipper lorry. But the claimants have not added the owner and insurer of the jeep. The Tribunal considering the manner of accident fixed the liability of the tipper lorry as 75% and that of the jeep driver as 25%. As the accident occurred - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29738 MFA No. 3614 of 2016 due to the negligence of both the drivers, this Court finds that contributory negligence of each of them is to be fixed as 50%. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents stated that he filed Ex.P8 DD cash receipt to show that Prashanth Shetty, received Rs.75,000/- into his account on 20.03.2007 and also on 04.04.2007 i.e., 15 days prior to the date of death. The Tribunal considering the said fact has rightly fixed his income as Rs.12,000/- per month. The petitioner mainly contended that he is doing agriculture and also he is a marble contractor merely because certain amounts are reflected in his bank account, it cannot be said that he got the said amounts through his business. He has not filed any document to show that he is doing agriculture and marble contractor. As he failed to prove the income, as the accident is of the year 2007, this Court finds that it reasonable to take his notional income as Rs.4,000/- per month as per the charge prepared by the by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. He was aged 28 years at the time of the accident and the relevant multiplier is '17'. He is entitled for 40% towards future prospects as per National - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29738 MFA No. 3614 of 2016 Insurance Company Ltd V.s Pranay Sethi and Ors1 and 1/3rd is to be deducted towards his personal expenses as per Sarala Verma (Smt) And Others V/S Delhi Transport Corporation And Another2. Loss of dependency comes to Rs.4,000/- + 40% X 12 X 17 - 1/3rd =Rs.7,61,600/-. Learned counsel for the accused stated while cross examining PW.2 father of the deceased stated that he cannot get PW.1 before the Court and the counsel stated that as per their knowledge she remarried. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company V/S Nanu Ram Alias Chubru Ram And Ors3, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of spousal consortium to petitioner No.1, and petitioner No.2 and 3 are entitled for an amount of Rs.40,000/- each towards filial consortium and they are also entitled for and amount of Rs.30,000/- under the conventional head as per the citation in Pranay sethi (supra). 6. Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below: 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29738 MFA No. 3614 of 2016 7. Hence, the claimants are entitled for a total compensation of Rs.9,11,600/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 8. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 08.02.2016 passed in MVC.No.648/2010 on the file of the learned II Additional District Judge and III Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mangalore, D.K, is modified. iii. The claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.9,11,600/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.14,30,250/- granted by the Tribunal. Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1. Spousal consortium 40,000/- 2. Filial consortium 80,000/- 3. Conventional heads 30,000/- 4. Loss of dependency 7,61,600/- Total 9,11,600/- - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29738 MFA No. 3614 of 2016 iv. Respondent No.2 / Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation and it is at liberty to recover 50% from the owner and insurer of the jeep bearing No.CRX-1160; v. Respondent No.2 / Insurance Company stated that he already deposited 50% of the awarded amount and it approximately comes to Rs.10,00,000/-. Therefore, this Court finds that all the claimants are permitted to withdraw the amount equally and if there is any excess amount, appellant is entitled for refund of the said amount. vi. The amount already in deposit is to be transferred to Tribunal. vii. Registry is directed to send back the records. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE PNV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29