- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4752 OF 2021(MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2528 OF 2022(MV-D) IN MFA No. 4752/2021 BETWEEN: 1. CHAITHRA M W/O LATE HARISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS 2. NAYAN GOWDA H S/O LATE HARISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS 3. MOHANISH GOWDA S/O LATE HARISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS SINCE APPELLANT NOS. 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS REP: BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT. CHAITHRA M 4. KRISHNAPPA @ KRISHNAYYA S/O SONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS 5. NARAYANAMMA W/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS ALL ARE R/O MEDIHALA VILLAGE AND POST Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-563 101 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY H, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NARAYANASWAMY B.M S/O LATE B MUNIVENKATASWAMY AGE MAJOR R/AT MEDIHALA VILLAGE AND POST KOLAR TALUK AND DISTRICT-563 101 2. MEGMA HDI GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD., I FLOOR, H.M ASTRID NO.36 J.C ROAD, BENGALURU-560 002 REP: BY ITS MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRADEEP B, ADVOCATE FOR R2, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.31.07.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.136/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, KOLAR, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 2528/2022 BETWEEN: LEGAL OFFICER MAGMA HDI GIC LTD 1ST FLOOR, HM ASTRID NO.36 JC ROAD BENGALURU 560 002 NOW REP BY ITS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 LEGAL OFFICER MAGMA HDI GIC LTD NO.36, II FLOOR MINERVA CIRCLE J.C ROAD BANGALORE - 27 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. CHAITHRA M W/O LATE HARISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS 2. NAYAN GOWDA H S/O LATE HARISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS 3. MOHANISH GOWDA S/O LATE HARISH KUMAR AGED ABOUT 6 YEARS SINCE 2ND & 3RD RESPONDENT ARE MINORS, WILL BE REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER/NG I.e. 1ST RESPONDENT SMT. CHAITRA 4. KRISHNAPPA @ KRISHNAYYA S/O SONNAPPA AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS 5. NARAYANAMMA W/O KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS ALL ARE R/AT MEDIHALA VILLAGE & POST, KOLAR TALUK & DISTRICT 6. NARAYANASWAMY B.M S/O LATE B MUNIVENKATASWAMY - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 R/AT MEDIHALA VILLAGE & POST KOLAR TALUK ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PAVANCHANDRA SHETTY H, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R5, VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 09.07.2026, VIDE ORDER DATED 12.07.2024, NOTICE TO R6 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 31.07.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 136/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, KOLAR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS. 23,00,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS PAYMENT. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT 1. While MFA.No.2528/2022 is by the insurer challenging attribution of negligence on the driver of the tractor trailer and also challenging the quantum of compensation, MFA.No.4752/2021 is by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded vide judgment and award dated 31.07.2021 passed in MVC.No.136/2020 for the accidental death of Harish Kumar. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 2. The occurrence of the accident and the death of Harish Kumar due to said accident are not in dispute. 3. The brief facts of the case are that on 19.03.2020 at about 8.45 p.m., when deceased Harish Kumar riding his motorcycle bearing registration No.KA05 ED 9390 reached near bridge of Medihala Gate on Medihala Road, the tractor trailer bearing registration No.KA07 T 4531 4532 came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle. As a result of which, the deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries and thereafter, he was immediately shifted to R.L.Jalappa Hospital, Kolar, and from there, he was shifted to KIMS Hospital, Bengaluru, where he succumbed to the injuries. Pursuant to the same, the chargesheet was laid against the driver of the tractor trailer. 4. For the accidental death of Harish Kumar, his legal heirs, filed claim petition in MVC.No.136/2020 and the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.23,00,000/- along with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till its payment. Aggrieved by the same and seeking enhancement of compensation, the claimants are before this Court in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 MFA.No.4752/2021. However, aggrieved by the quantum of compensation and also challenging attribution of negligence entirely on the driver of the tractor trailer, the insurer is before this Court in MFA.No.2528/2022. 5. Learned counsel for the insurer primarily would contend that the accident in question had occurred due to the negligence of the deceased - rider of the motorcycle. By placing reliance on Ex.P4 - spot sketch, he would contend that the tractor trailer came from North to travel towards South i.e., from Medihala towards Vemgal in a 12 feet width road. However, the deceased was traveling from North to move towards South i.e., opposite direction and suddenly rode the motorcycle to the extreme right side of the road and went towards right side of the trailer, as a result the accident had occurred. In such circumstances, it is clear that the accident had occurred due to the negligence of the deceased - rider of the motorcycle. Further, he would contend that Ex.P5 - spot mahazar clearly depicts that the accident occurred on the extreme right side of the road. As such, attribution of negligence solely on the driver of the tractor trailer is - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 untenable. He would also contend that the amount awarded under all the heads is exorbitant, so also the interest at 9% p.a. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal of the insurer. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimants would contend that the Tribunal has rightly held that the driver of the tractor trailer is entirely responsible for the occurrence of the accident. Even otherwise, the FIR, complaint and the charge sheet material would clearly reveal that the driver of the tractor trailer alone was responsible for the occurrence of the accident. He would also contend that the amount awarded by the Tribunal under all the heads is meager and the same requires to be enhanced. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal of the claimants. 7. It is not in dispute that as a result of the motor vehicle accident which occurred on 19.03.2020, Harish Kumar, a 34 year old died. The coverage of policy to the offending vehicle is also not in dispute. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record. No doubt the charge sheet has been laid against the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 driver of the tractor trailer, however, on careful examination of Ex.P4 - spot sketch and Ex.P5 - spot mahazar, it could be gathered that tractor trailer came from North to South and while taking turn in the left side of the road, the deceased rider of the motorcycle, who came from South, suddenly rode his motorcycle to the extreme right side of the road and dashed against the right side of the trailer, as a result of which, the accident had occurred. In such circumstances, it could be fairly presumed that the deceased had also contributed some extent of negligence to the occurrence of the accident. As such, I deem it just and appropriate to attribute contributory negligence on the deceased rider of the motorcycle to the extent of 10%. 9. As regards compensation, the Tribunal, on assessment of evidence adduced before it, has awarded the following sums as compensation: Sl. No. Particulars Amount in (Rs.) 1. Loss of Dependency 21,50,000 2. Loss of Consortium 25,000 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 3. Loss of estate 20,000 4. Loss of love and affection 25,000 5. Funeral and other expenses 10,000 6. Medical expenditure 75,000 Total 20,75,000 10. In order to arrive at the loss of dependency, the Tribunal has determined the monthly income at Rs.12,000/-. Since there is no credible documentary 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 2020, would be Rs.14,500/-. 11. Since deceased was aged 34 years, 40% requires to be added to the monthly income towards future prospects, which would result in the income to be Rs.20,300/-. 12. Since there are five dependents of the deceased, 1/4th requires to be deducted towards personal expenses, making his monthly income to be Rs.15,225/-. The income of the deceased - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 for the purposes of determining the loss of dependency would thus be Rs.15,225/- 13. As the deceased was aged 34 years, a multiplier of '16' would have to be applied. 14. Consequently, the claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.29,23,200/- (15,225 x 12 x 16) towards “loss of dependency”. 15. The Tribunal has not awarded loss of consortium to all the claimants i.e., As such, the claimants, being wife, children and parents of deceased, are entitled for loss of consortium at Rs.48,400/- each, i.e., in all, Rs.2,42,000/-, The claimants would also be entitled for Rs.36,300/- under conventional head. The amount of Rs.75,000/- awarded towards medical expenditure, being based on documentary evidence, is affirmed. 16. Thus, the claimants, in modification of the impugned award, would be entitled to the following sums: Sl. No. Particulars Amount (In Rs.) - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 1. Loss of Dependency 29,23,200 2. Loss of Consortium 2,42,000 3. Conventional Heads 36,300 4. Medical expenditure 75,000 5. Less 10% contributory negligence 3,27,650 Total 29,48,850 17. Accordingly, the claimants would be entitled for compensation of Rs.29,48,850/- as against Rs.23,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, instead of 9% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. 18. 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. 19. The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the concerned Tribunal. 20. The apportionment of compensation amount shall be in terms of the award of the Tribunal. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34870 MFA No. 4752 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2528 of 2022 The appeal of the claimants as well as the appeal of the insurer are accordingly allowed in part. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45