- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18621 MFA No. 4536 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4536 OF 2024 (MV-D) BETWEEN: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, TUMAKURU DIVISION, TUMKURU-572101 REP. BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER K.S.R.T.C. CENTRAL OFFICE K H ROAD, SHANTHINAGARA BENGALURU-560027 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. BALARAJ A C., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. KAMALAMMA W/O LATE YALLABHOVI AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, RESIDING AT PARASHURA MADEVARAKOTE DHARMAPURA HIRIYUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577204 NOW AT SIRA GATE TUMKURU TOWN-572101 2. JAYAMMA D/O LATE YALLABHOVI W/O CHANDRANNA G H Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18621 MFA No. 4536 of 2024 AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, RESIDING AT PARASHURA MADEVARAKOTE DHARMAPURA HIRIYUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577204 NOW AT SIRA GATE TUMKURU TOWN-572101 3. LAKSHMIDEVI Y D/O LATE YALLABHOVI W/O HANUMANTHIAHA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT PARASHURA MADEVARAKOTE DHARMAPURA HIRIYUR TALUK CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577204 NOW AT SIRA GATE TUMKURU TOWN-572101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. V B SIDDARAMAIAH., ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.01.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.527/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, TUMAKURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.8,37,044/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellant-KSRTC under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18621 MFA No. 4536 of 2024 challenging judgment and award dated 06.01.2024 passed in MVC No.527/2022 by the III Additional District Judge and Additional MACT, Tumakuru, awarding the compensation of Rs.8,37,044/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, on 21.02.2022 one Sri. Yallabhovi was walking on the extreme side of Amarapura-Hiriyur road, at that time, a KSRTC Bus bearing No.KA-06-F1002 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him on his backside. As a result of which he sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot. His wife and children filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.25,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire oral and documentary evidence on record - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18621 MFA No. 4536 of 2024 granted an amount of Rs.8,37,044/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realisation. Being aggrieved by the said order, appellant has preferred this appeal. 4. It is stated that Yallabhovi was aged 70 years as on the date of the accident and was doing carpentry work and also doing agriculture work and was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. In the written statement, it is contended that the accident was occurred due to the negligence on the part of the deceased who was crossing the road without observing the vehicles on the road and also disputed his age and income. The tribunal has taken notional income as Rs.15,500/- which is on higher side and 1/3rd of the income has to be deducted as petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are dependants and married daughters. The respondent examined RW.1 driver of the KSRTC bus to prove contributory negligence of deceased Yallahovi. The tribunal granted 20% of compensation under the conventional heads. At the time of accident, age of the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18621 MFA No. 4536 of 2024 deceased shown was 74 years, but in the post mortem report age was shown as 70 years. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the tribunal has deducted 50% towards personal expenses instead of 1/3rd. 5. The manner of accident shows that while Yallabhovi was crossing the road on extreme left side of the road then driver of the bus came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed from the back side. The petitioners have not examined any eye witnesses though respondent examined RW.1 driver of the bus. They have not given any complaint immediately after the accident and it is not their case that road was curved. RW.1 stated that the petitioner came on the road suddenly. Driver of the bus neither informed to the Depot manager nor given complaint, at the earliest point of time. He stated so only during his evidence before the Court and said objection was also not raised in the written statement it is for the respondent to plead and prove contributory negligence. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18621 MFA No. 4536 of 2024 6. In the written statement, it is stated that accident occurred only due to the negligence of the deceased but they have not raised plea of contributory negligence. Therefore, their argument that there is contributory negligence of Yallabhovi while crossing the road cannot be accepted now. As per the post mortem report, he was aged 70 years. In the Aadhar card, year of birth is mentioned as 1948, as such he was aged 74 years as on the date of accident. But Aadhar card is not filed before the tribunal. Moreover, it is not an authenticated document to prove the age and moreover only year of birth is mentioned. Therefore, the tribunal has rightly considered his age as per the post mortem report. 7. Though it is stated that Yallabhovi was earning Rs.25,000/- per month, but the claimants have not produced any substantive evidence to prove the said aspect. The accident is of the year 2022 and the Tribunal has rightly taken the notional income of the Yallabhovi at Rs.15,500/- per month as per the chart prepared by the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18621 MFA No. 4536 of 2024 Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Yallabhovi was about 70 years and the applicable multiplier is '5' and 50% is to be deducted towards his personal expenses as per citation reported in the case of Puttamma Vs. Managing Director in MFA No.6818/2019. Accordingly, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.4,65,000/- (15,500 x 12 x 5- 50%). Claimant No.1 is entitled for spousal consortium of Rs.44,000/- and claimant Nos.2 and 3 are married daughters entitled for parental consortium of Rs.44,000/- each. Rs.33,000/- is granted under conventional heads. Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below: Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1 Towards loss of dependency 4,65,000/- 2 Towards spousal consortium 44,000/- 2 Towards parental consortium (44,000 X 2) 88,000/- 3 Towards conventional heads 33,000/- Total 6,30,000/- - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18621 MFA No. 4536 of 2024 8. Hence, compensation reduced from 8,37,044/- to 6,30,000/-. As the insurance company already deposited Rs.25,000/- towards statutory amount, same has to be deducted and it amounts to 6,30,000-25,000= 6,05,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 9. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 06.01.2024 passed in MVC No.527/2022 on the file of the III Additional District Judge and Additional MACT, Tumakuru, is modified. iii. The claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs. 6,05,000/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization. iv. Respondent/Insurance Company/KSRTC has already deposited 50% of the awarded amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18621 MFA No. 4536 of 2024 Respondents/Insurance Company/KSRTC is directed to deposit balance compensation along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order. v. On such deposit, petitioner No.1- wife of the deceased Yallabhovi is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it. As petitioner Nos.2 and 3 are major children, they are not depending on the income of their father as such, they not entitled to the compensation. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE SKS