- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33552 MFA No. 1041 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1041 OF 2020 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. MR. BANTU MALEKUDIYA S/O LATE KARIYA MALEKUDIYA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 2. MR. VENKAPPA MALEKUDIYA S/O BANTU MALEKUDIYA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS BOTH ARE RESIDING AT BANGALAYA HOUSE, MACHCHINA VILLAGE, BELTHANGADY TALUK, D.K. 574 214. 3. MRS. SUMITHRA W/O RAJESH, D/O BANTU MALEKUDIYA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS POYYAMOOLE HOUSE, PUNACHA VILLAGE, PARIYALTHADKA POST, BANTWAL TALUK, D.K.574 211. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. MAHESH KAJE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. MOHAMMAD KUNHI, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS S/O ABDULLA K., R/O UBARADKA HOUSE, NEAR UBARADKA SOCIETY, UBARADKA MITHUR VILLAGE, SULLIA TALUK, D.K. 574 239. Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33552 MFA No. 1041 of 2020 2. ABDUL RAHIMAN AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O M.MAHAMMAD M/S. SHALIMAR AGENCIES, GANDHINAGARA, SULLIA KASABA VILLAGE, SULLIA TALUK, D.K.574 239. 3. THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., SHRI KSHETRA DHARMASTHALA BUILDING, MAIN ROAD, PUTTUR, D.K.DISTRICT-574 201. 4. NARAYANA GOWDA, S/O PADMA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS MARAKADA HOUSE, MACHINE VILLAGE, BELTHANGADY TALUK, D.K.574 214. 5. UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY LTD PRABHU BUILDING, MAIN ROAD, PUTTUR, D.K. DISTRICT-574201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.G.RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; SRI.ASHOK N.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R-3; SRI.A.M.VENKATESH, ADVOCATE FOR R-5; NOTICE TO R-4 IS SD AND UNREPRESENTED; V/O/D 14.03.2024 APPEAL AGAINST R-1 IS ABATED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 31.10.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.1812/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, PUTTUR, D.K. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33552 MFA No. 1041 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The appeal is filed seeking for enhancement of compensation. 2. It is not in dispute that as a result of the motor vehicle accident which occurred on 2010, Parameshwari, a 50 years 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 one Parameshwari w/o Bantu Malekudiya. The Tribunal has thereafter proceeded to award the following sums as compensation: Sl. No. Particulars Amount in (Rs.) 1. Loss of Dependency 5,19,948 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33552 MFA No. 1041 of 2020 2. Loss of Consortium 10,000 3. Funeral expenses & Transportation charges 10,000 Total 5,40,000 5. In order to arrive at the loss of dependency, the Tribunal has determined the monthly income, notionally at Rs.5,000/-. 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 2010, would be Rs.5,500/-. 6. Since the deceased was aged 50 years and was a home maker, 10% requires to be added to her monthly income towards future prospects, which would result in the income to be Rs.6,050/- (5,500 + 550 = 6,050/-). 7. If 1/3rd is deducted towards personal expenses, her monthly income would be Rs.4,033/-. The income of the deceased for the purposes of determining the loss of dependency would thus be Rs.4,033/- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33552 MFA No. 1041 of 2020 8. As the deceased was aged 50 years, a multiplier of '13' would have to be applied. 9. Consequently, the claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.6,29,200/- (4,033 x 12 x 13 = Rs.6,29148/- rounded off to Rs.6,29,200/-) towards “loss of dependency”. 10. The claimants being the dependents, they would each be entitled to a sum of Rs.48,400/- towards “loss of consortium” i.e., in all Rs.1,45,200 and they would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.36,300/- under the “conventional heads”. 11. 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 6,29,200 2. Loss of Consortium 1,45,200 3. Conventional Heads 36,300/- Total 8,10,700 12. Thus, the claimant would be entitled for compensation of Rs.8,10,700/- as against Rs.5,40,000/- awarded by the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:33552 MFA No. 1041 of 2020 Tribunal, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. 13. 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. 14. 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 GPG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33