- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 154 OF 2023 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. HONNAMMA W/O LATE MARIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O MADANAYAKANAHALLI MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SHIVA PRASAD M, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC MANDYA DEPTO MANDYA KSRTC BUS STAND MANDYA. OWNER -CUM-INTERNAL INSURER OF KSRTC BUS BEARING No. KA 10-F-0354 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ASHOK KUMAR M, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:02.09.2022 PASSED IN MVC No.1076/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MADDUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 02.09.2022 passed in MVC No.1076/2019 by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Maddur to the extent of contributory negligence of the deceased held by the Tribunal at 40% and also seeking enhancement of compensation awarded. 2. Even though the appeal is listed today for admission, with the consent of both the counsels, it is taken up for hearing. 3. The appellant/claimant made a claim petition praying to award compensation for the death of her son Nityananda in a road traffic accident occurred on 29.12.2018 contending that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of driver of KSRTC bus bearing Regn.No.KA-10/F-0354. The - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 Tribunal after recording the evidence, appreciated the evidence on record and assessed the compensation and awarded compensation under different heads as under: Sl.no. Heads Amount in (Rs.) 01. Compensation towards loss of dependency 16,80,000/- 02. Compensation towards loss to estate 15,000/- 03. Compensation towards funeral and obsequies ceremony and transportation expenses 15,000/- 04. Loss of consortium 30,000/- Total 17,40,000/- 4. The Tribunal has also awarded interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The Tribunal held that the deceased who was crossing the road has also contributed to the accident and assessed his negligence at 40% and directed the Corporation to pay 60% of the compensation assessed. The appellant/claimant challenging the said finding of the Tribunal and also seeking enhancement has filed the present appeal. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant learned counsel for respondent – Corporation. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that the deceased was crossing the road and he was on left side and sole negligence is on the part of the driver of the bus and Tribunal erred in holding that deceased contributed to the extent of 40%. The Tribunal has awarded consortium in a sum of Rs.30,000/-, but it requires to be enhanced to Rs.40,000/-. He further submits that deduction towards personal expenses of the deceased taken at 50% is on higher side and it has to be taken at 40% and on that point, he placed reliance on the decision of High Court Punjab and Haryana in the case of Saroj Devi and others vs. Rajpal and others (MANU/PH/1225/2026). With regard to contributory negligence, he has relied upon the following decisions: • MFA No.162/2021 – Smt.Kamalesh Kumari vs. The Managing Director, KSRTC - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 • MANU/KA/1665/2020 = ILR 2021 KAR 235 – The North East Road Transport Corporation vs. Anzamma and Ors. • Ranjeet and another vs. Abdul Kayam and another – SLP(C) No.10351/2019. 7. He further contended that the claimants are entitled to escalation @ 10% on conventional heads and on that point he placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Anjali and Ors. Vs. Lokendra Rathod and Ors (MANU/SC/1583/2022). With this he prayed to allow the appeal. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent/Corporation would contend that the deceased was crossing the road without observing the vehicles on the road and it is on Bangalore-Mysore highway and considering the said aspect, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the contributory negligence on the part of the deceased at 40%. The compensation awarded under other heads is just and proper and there are no grounds for enhancement. With this he prays for dismissal of the appeal. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 9. Having heard the learned counsels, the Court has perused judgment, award and trial Court records. The following points arise for consideration: (i) Whether the Tribunal is justified in holding that the deceased has contributed to the accident to the extent of 40%? (ii) Whether there are any grounds for enhancement of compensation? On Point No.1. 10. The accident occurred on 29.12.2018 at 7.45 p.m. At that time, the deceased was crossing Bangalore-Mysore Highway road and KSRTC bus bearing Regn.No.KA-10/F-0354 came and dashed him. As a result, he sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The charge sheet, Ex.P9 has been filed against the driver of the KSRTC bus for the offence under Sections 279 and 304-A of IPC. The Tribunal considering the fact that the deceased was crossing the road held that he has contributed to the accident and assessed his - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 negligence at 40%. Ex.P5 is the sketch of the spot of the accident which indicate brake marks near the spot of the accident. Even Ex.P3, Mahazar of the spot of the accident indicate that at a distance of 7 feet from the spot of the accident there are brake/tyre marks of the bus. The very fact of the brake/tyre marks found on the spot indicates that the driver of the KSRTC Bus on seeing deceased crossing the road applied brakes in order to save the accident and inspite of that accident occurred. Considering the said aspect, it is clear that the deceased came on the road suddenly and contributed to the accident. The assessment of the contributory negligence of the claimant to the accident at 40% is not proper. Considering the fact that the accident occurred on the left side, near the edge of the road, contributory negligence of the deceased is assessed at 20%. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered. On Point No.2: 11. The Tribunal has rightly taken the income of the deceased at Rs.12,500/- p.m. since the accident has taken - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 place in the year 2018 which is the notional income fixed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority for the said year. The deceased was aged 35 years and the Tribunal has rightly applied the multiplier ‘16’. The Tribunal has deducted 50% in the said income towards personal expenses of the deceased as he was unmarried/bachelor. In the case relied on by the learned counsel for the appellant of Punjab and Haryana High Court the deduction towards personal expenses of deceased has been taken at 40% of his income on the ground that the case is exceptional case. However, there are no exceptional circumstances to take personal expenses of deceased less than 50%. The claimant is the mother, therefore, the Tribunal has rightly taken deduction of personal expenses at 50%. Considering the said aspect the compensation awarded towards loss of dependency is just and proper. 12. The Tribunal has awarded consortium at Rs.30,000/-. The claimant being the mother is entitled to filial consortium in a sum of Rs.40,000/- as per the decision - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram (2018) 18 SCC 130. Therefore, the compensation awarded towards loss of consortium by the Tribunal in a sum of Rs.30,000/- requires to be enhanced to Rs.40,000/-. The accident has taken place in the year 2018 and as per the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co.Ltd vs. Pranay Sethi (2017) 16 SCC 680, the escalation on conventional heads is 10% for every three years. Since three years has not elapsed from the said decision of Pranay Sethi, the claimant is not entitled for escalation on conventional heads. In view of the above, the claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.17,40,000/- Now there is enhancement of Rs.10,000/- under the head loss of consortium which is required to be added to the said compensation determined by the Tribunal. Therefore, the total compensation determined is Rs.17,50,000/-. The Tribunal has deducted Rs.15,000/- which is paid by the Corporation to the claimant. Therefore, the total - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 compensation is Rs.17,35,000/-. The claimant is entitled to 80% of the said compensation of Rs.17,35,000/- which comes to Rs.13,88,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till realization. In view of the above, the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part. ii) The appellant -claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.13,88,000/- as against Rs.10,35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. iii) Respondent/Corporation shall deposit the said enhanced compensation of Rs.3,53,000/- (Rs.17,35,000 – Rs.10,35,000/-) with interest before the Tribunal, within a period of six weeks from this day, failing which, it is liable to pay interest @ 9% p.a. from this day till - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33342 MFA No. 154 of 2023 payment/deposit of enhanced compensation amount. iv) The appellant/claimant is entitled to release of entire enhanced compensation. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE DKB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36