- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010370152020 NC: 2026:KHC:36852 MFA No. 2627 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2627 OF 2021(MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT MAHADEVI W/O LATE CHIKKARAJANAIK, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, 2. C LAKSHMI D/O LATE CHIKKARAJANAIK, AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 3. C RAKSHITHA D/O LATE CHIKKARAJANAIK, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, 4. SMT. SAKAMMA D/O LATE CHIKKARAJANAIK, AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS, 5. SHREYAS S/O LATE CHIKKARAJANAIK, AGED ABOUT 12 YEARS, APPELLANTS NO.3 TO 5 ARE MINORS REP BY NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER 1ST APPELLANT. ALL ARE R/AT SOMESHWARAPURA VILLAGE, VARUNA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK, DISTRICT 570 001 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH N.D, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010370152020 NC: 2026:KHC:36852 MFA No. 2627 of 2021 AND: 1. MOHAMMED GHOUSE AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, R/AT NO 3087, GHOLANDAS STREET, LASHKAR MOHALLA, MYSORE 2. THE DIVISION CONTROLLER KSRTC CHAMARAJANAGRA DIVISION, CHAMARAJANAGRA-571 313 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JAGADEESH G.S, ADVOCATE FOR R2, VIDE ORDER DATED 02/12/2021, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.18.12.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1297/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. 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 seeking for enhancement of compensation of Rs.15,98,840/-, awarded by the Tribunal vide award and judgment dated 18.12.2019 in MVC No.1297/2018. - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010370152020 NC: 2026:KHC:36852 MFA No. 2627 of 2021 2. It is not in dispute that as a result of the motor vehicle accident which occurred on 06.06.2018, Chikkarajanaika, a 40 year old died. 3. The Tribunal, on assessment of 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 Chikkarajanaika. The Tribunal has thereafter proceeded to award the following sums as compensation: Sl. No. Particulars Amount in (Rs.) 1. Loss of Dependency 15,18,840 2. Loss of Consortium 10,000 3. Funeral expenses 20,000 4. Love and affection 30,000 5. Loss of estate 20,000 Total 15,98,840 Less Interim Compensation 50,000 Total 15,48,840 4. The Tribunal has held that the deceased had contributed to the accident and has attributed contributory negligence at - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010370152020 NC: 2026:KHC:36852 MFA No. 2627 of 2021 25% on the part of the deceased. However, no such deductions were made from the total compensation towards contributory negligence. 5. Learned counsel for the claimants contended that the Tribunal has erred in attributing 25% contributory negligence on the part of the deceased as the driver of the KSRTC bus drove the bus in high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and when he applied the brakes suddenly, the accident took place. Hence, had he driven the bus with utmost care and caution, the accident could have been easily avoided. He would also contend that the sums awarded by Tribunal under different heads are meager. Accordingly, he prays for enhancement of compensation and for setting aside the findings with regard to contributory negligence. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent - KSRTC contended that the deceased who was riding the motor cycle was riding in rash and negligent manner without a valid driving license and with two pillion riders and was also intoxicated with alcohol, which were prejudicial to the traffic rules, thereby failing to exercise due diligence and attributed negligence for - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010370152020 NC: 2026:KHC:36852 MFA No. 2627 of 2021 causing of the accident. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly attributed 25% negligence on the rider of the motorcycle. He would further contend that the Tribunal has rightly awarded compensation under all the heads and therefore, the same requires no interference at the hands of this Court. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 7. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record. As could be seen from records, the deceased was riding the motorcycle with two pillion riders. However, only for that reason, it cannot be presumed that the deceased has contributed 25% negligence to the accident. The charge sheet has been laid against the driver of the offending vehicle. The driver of the bus is duty bound to be cautious while driving a heavy vehicle and that he will have a clear view of the vehicles moving ahead. As such, I am of the view that both the deceased and the driver of the bus were responsible for the accident. However, attributing 25% of contributory negligence on the part of the deceased is excessive. Therefore, I deem it just and prudent to attribute contributory negligence at 20% on the part of the deceased. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010370152020 NC: 2026:KHC:36852 MFA No. 2627 of 2021 8. In order to arrive at the loss of dependency, the Tribunal has determined the monthly income, notionally at Rs.9,000/-. 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 2018, would be Rs.12,500/-. 9. Since the deceased was aged about 40 years and was self-employed, 25% requires to be added to the monthly income towards future prospects, which would result in the income to be Rs.15,625/-. 10. since number of dependants are five, 1/4th is to be deducted towards his personal expenses, then his monthly income would become Rs.11,719/-. The income of the deceased for the purposes of determining the loss of dependency would thus be Rs.11,719/- 11. As the deceased was aged 40 years, a multiplier of '15' would have to be applied. - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010370152020 NC: 2026:KHC:36852 MFA No. 2627 of 2021 12. Consequently, the claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.21,09,420/- (Rs.11,719 x 12 x 15) towards “loss of dependency”. 13. The claimants being the wife, three daughters and a son, would each be entitled to a sum of Rs.48,400/- towards “loss of consortium” i.e., in all Rs.2,42,000/- and they would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.36,300/- under the “conventional heads”. 14. 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 21,09,420 2. Loss of Consortium 2,42,000 3. Conventional Heads 36,300 Total 23,87,720 Less 20% towards contributory negligence 4,77,544 Total 19,10,176 Less interim compensation 50,000 Total 18,60,176 - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010370152020 NC: 2026:KHC:36852 MFA No. 2627 of 2021 15. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for compensation of Rs.19,10,176/- as against Rs.15,98,840/- awarded by the Tribunal, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. Since a sum of Rs.50,000/- has already been paid to the claimants as interim compensation, the Corporation is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded as aforesaid 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. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38