- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34406 MFA No. 1901 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1901 OF 2020(MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. PANEER SELVAM, S/O LATE S. NAMMALVAR, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, R/AT NO.48/2, 7TH MAIN ROAD, NEW STREET, KUMBARAKOPPALU, MYSURU - 570 001. 2. N. DHANARAJ, S/O LATE S.NAMMALVAR, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT NO.66B, DHULAKANANATHAMMAN, KOVIL STREET, PERIYA MILAGU, PARAI, THIRUCHIRAPALLY, TAMIL NADU - 620 001. 3. N. CHANDRA SHEKAR, S/O LATE S. NAMMALVAR, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.81, KAMARAJAPURAM, PONNAGAR, THIRUCHIRAPALLY, TAMIL NADU - 620 001. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. RAJA L., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34406 MFA No. 1901 of 2020 AND: 1. VENKATESH, S/O RUDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT NO.365, CHANDAGALU VILLAGE, SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 401. 2. PREMAKUMAR N, PROP: N.R.P.B. BLOCKS, NO.25/1, JIGANI HOBLI, YERANDAHALLI, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT - 560 102. 3. BHARATI AXA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.2951/A, D29/1, 1ST FLOOR, TEMPLE ROAD, KALIDASA CIRCLE, V.V. MOHALLA, MYSURU - 570 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.ASHOK N PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R1 & R2 ARE HELD SUFFICIENT VIDE ORDER DATED 24.10.2025; R1 AND R2 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.10.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.697/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE, PRL. COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MYSURU, AS A PRESIDING OFFICER, MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34406 MFA No. 1901 of 2020 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 by the claimants seeking for enhancement of compensation. 2. It is not in dispute that, as a result of the motor vehicle accident which occurred on 30.10.2015, N.Mohan, a 45 year old died. 3. 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 N.Mohan. The Tribunal has thereafter proceeded to award the following sums as compensation: Sl. No. Particulars Amount in (Rs.) 1. Towards loss of financial dependency 5,04,000 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34406 MFA No. 1901 of 2020 2. Towards loss of love and affection 40,000 3. Towards estate 15,000 4. Towards funeral expenses and transportation of body 15,000 Total 5,74,000 4. The Tribunal has considered the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.6,000/- per month. Since there was no credible and cogent evidence with regard to the income of the deceased, the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income at Rs.6,000/-. Since the accident is of the year 2015, it would be appropriate and prudent to adopt the monthly income determined by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, which would be Rs.9,000/-. 5. The deceased was aged about 45 years at the time of his death, as such, the claimants are entitled for 25% future prospects, which would come to Rs.11,250/- (Rs.9,000 + 25%) 6. Since the deceased was 45 years old at the time of his death, the appropriate multiplier for the calculation of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34406 MFA No. 1901 of 2020 loss of dependency would be '14'. Similarly, as the claimants are the brothers of the deceased, they cannot be treated as dependents of the deceased, as such, 50% of the income shall be deducted towards personal expense. Therefore the income for the assessment of loss of dependency would be Rs.5,625/-. 7. Thus, the appellants are entitled for a sum of ₹9,45,000/- (₹5,625x12x14). under the head of 'loss of dependency'. 8. The appellants are entitled for 'consortium' at Rs.44,000/- each ie., (Rs.44,000 x 3)= Rs.1,32,000/-. The appellants are also entitled for a sum of ₹33,000/- under the head 'loss of estate' 9. The compensation of Rs.15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head 'funeral expenses and transportation of dead body', remains unaltered. 10. Thus, the claimants, in modification of the impugned award, would be entitled to the following sums: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34406 MFA No. 1901 of 2020 Sl. No. Particulars Amount (In Rs.) 1. Towards loss of dependency 9,45,000 2. Towards Consortium 1,32,000 3. Towards loss of estate 33,000 4. Towards funeral expenses and transportation of body 15,000 Total 11,25,000 11. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for compensation of Rs.11,25,000/- as against Rs.5,74,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. 12. A contention has been raised by learned counsel for the appellants that the Tribunal has erred by exonerating the insurance company, for the reason that the policy was not existing for the offending vehicle. By placing reliance on Ex.P13, he states that the policy was issued on 31.10.2015 and the accident had occurred on 30.10.2015, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34406 MFA No. 1901 of 2020 as such, the policy covers and the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation. 13. However, learned counsel for the insurance company contended that Ex.R4 is the policy certificate issued by the insurance company which clearly depicts that the policy was existing from 01.11.2015 to 31.10.2016. As such, there was no policy existing as on the date of the accident. According to him, Ex.P13 is the concocted document. 14. On careful examination of Exs.P13 and R4, I am of the considered view that there is a substantial force in the submission of the learned counsel for the insurance company. Ex.R4 is the original insurance policy issued by the insurance company, whereas, Ex.P13 appears to be obtained by the claimants subsequent to the accident. Even assuming that the said policy was issued by the insurance company, the same was issued on 31.10.2015 i.e., the next day of the accident, as such, the Tribunal is justified in exonerating the insurance company. I find no - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34406 MFA No. 1901 of 2020 ground to interfere in the said findings of the Tribunal. 15. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are 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. 16. The apportionment of compensation amount shall be in terms of the award of the Tribunal. 17. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part. Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE GH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 32