- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4903 OF 2020(MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4944 OF 2020(MV-D) IN MFA No. 4903/2020 BETWEEN: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, SHANTHINAGAR K.H ROAD, BENGALURU …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SUMANGALA A SWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRINIVAS B V S/O LATE VENKATESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS T BEGU, NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DIST-562 123 2. SMT VENKATALASKHMAMMA D/O LATE VENKATESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS NO.208, THAMMENAHALLI MAIN ROAD AMBEDKAR CIRCLE TOTADAGUDDADAHALLI NAGASANDRA, BENGALURU NORTH-560073 3. SMT GANGAMMA D/O LATE VENKATESHAPPA Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS KULAVANAHALLI POST DODDERI, KULAVANAHALLI BENGALURU RURAL DIST-562 111 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAGHU R, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 23.06.2020, PASSED IN MVC NO.7699/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE IV-ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND ACMM., COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-6), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,50,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9 PERCENT P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF PAYMENT. IN MFA NO. 4944/2020 BETWEEN: 1. SRI SRINIVAS B V S/O LATE VENKATESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT T.BEGUR NELAMANGALA TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTICT PIN-562123 2. SMT VENKATALAKSHMAMMA D/O LATE VENKATESHAPPA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS R/AT NO.208, THAMMENAHALLI MAIN ROAD, AMEDKAR CIRCLE TOTAGUDDADAHALLI NAGASANDRA BENGALURU-560 073 3. SMT GANGAMMA D/O LATE VENKATESHAPPA - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT KULAVANAHALLI DODDERI, KULAVANAHALLI POST BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT PIN-562 111 ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SUMANGALA A SWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND: KSRTC THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.H ROAD SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU-560 027 ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAGHU R, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.23.06.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.7699/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL JUDGE, ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU (SCCH-6), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISISON, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT 1. While MFA.No.4903/2020 is by the KSRTC challenging saddling of liability on the KSRTC as well as on the quantum of compensation, MFA.No.4944/2020 is by the claimants seeking - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 enhancement of compensation awarded vide judgment and award dated 23.06.2020 passed in MVC.No.7699/2018 by the Tribunal for the accidental death of Venkateshappa. 2. The occurrence of the accident and the death of Venkateshappa due to said accident are not in dispute. 3. The brief facts of the case are that on 22.11.2018 at about 3.30 p.m., when the deceased was riding pillion in a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA51-E 2457 being ridden by one Krishnamurthy, proceeding from Thyamagondlu towards T.Begur side on Tumkur - Bengaluru NH-4 road, the KSRTC bus bearing registration No.KA-06 F 1178 driven by its driver came from Tumkur side towards Bengaluru side in a high speed and dashed against the motorcycle. As a result of the impact, the deceased sustained fatal injuries and succumbed to the same. 4. For the accidental death of Venkateshappa, his legal heirs, filed claim petition in MVC.No.7699/2018 and the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 5. Heard the learned counsel for the claimants and the learned counsel for the KSRTC and perused the materials on record. 6. Learned counsel for the KSRTC would contend that the Tribunal has grossly erred by attributing the entire negligence on the part of driver of the offending bus, despite the driver of the bus drove the bus cautiously. She would further contend that as per Ex.P3 - sketch, the driver of the bus came from Tumkur side, whereas the rider of the motorcycle suddenly crossed the junction from Thyamagondlu side to move on to Tumkur-Bengaluru NH-4 road towards Bengaluru, as a result of which, the accident occurred. As such, the Tribunal ought to have saddled the liability on the rider as well as deceased also. Notwithstanding the above contention, she would contend that the Tribunal has erred in awarding exorbitant compensation under all the heads and also in awarding interest at 9%. Accordingly, she prays for allowing the appeal of the KSRTC. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimants would contend that the Tribunal, upon appreciation of entire oral and documentary evidence, has rightly saddled the liability on the - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 KSRTC. According to him, Ex.P3 - spot sketch clearly depicts that the accident occurred on the extreme right side of the Tumkur - Bengaluru Road and that after the rider of the motorcycle had crossed the junction and moved on to the Tumkur - Bengaluru Road towards Bengaluru, the bus came on the extreme right side and dashed against the motorcycle. He would also contend even if it is assumed for the sake of arguments that the rider of the motorcycle was negligent, the same cannot be saddled on the pillion rider since he being the pillion rider will have no control over the motorcycle. He would also contend that the Tribunal based on the sketch and other documents such as FIR, charge sheet, etc. has rightly attributed entire negligence on the driver of the bus. He would also contend that the Tribunal has erred in awarding meagre compensation under all the heads without properly considering the avocation, income of the deceased and other aspects. He would also contend that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding any sums towards loss of dependency although he had sons and daughter. Accordingly, he prays for allowing of the appeal - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 of the claimants by enhancing the compensation and dismissing the appeal of the KSRTC. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record. 9. It is not in dispute that as a result of the motor vehicle accident which occurred on 21.11.2018, Venkateshappa, a 60 year old died. 10. A perusal of Ex.P3 - spot sketch would reveal that the accident occurred near the junction where the rider of the motorcycle after crossing the junction moved on towards Bengaluru side in Tumkur - Bengaluru Road and at that time, the bus, which came from Tumkur side on the extreme right side of the road, in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the motorcycle resulting in the death of both the rider and the pillion rider. In such circumstances, it could be easily presumed that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending bus. Nevertheless, after investigation, the police laid charge sheet against the driver of - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 the offending bus. The said charge sheet has not been challenged by the KSRTC. As such, I am of the considered view that the Tribunal was justified in attributing entire negligence on the driver of the KSRTC. 11. 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 Consortium 1,20,000 2. Funeral and obsequies ceremonies expenses 15,000 3. Loss of estate 15,000 Total 1,50,000 12. The Tribunal has not awarded any sums towards loss of dependency. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in JITENDRA KUMAR Vs. SANJAY PRASAD - 2025 Supreme (Online) Supreme Court 5470, referring to the judgments in SEEMA RANI & OTHERS VS. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & OTHERS - 2025 SCC Online Supreme Court 283 and NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. VS. BIRENDER - (2017) 16 SCC 680, has awarded loss of dependency - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 based on the exposition of law in Birender's case, wherein it was observed as under: "It is thus settled by now that the legal representatives of the deceased have a right to apply for compensation. Having said that, it must necessarily follow that even the major married and earning sons of the deceased being legal representatives have a right to apply for compensation and it would be the bounden duty of the Tribunal to consider the application irrespective of the fact whether the legal representative concerned was fully dependent on the deceased and not to limit the claim towards conventional heads only." Thus, the claimants are entitled for compensation under loss of dependency. However, since they are majors, 50% requires to be deducted towards personal and living expenses. 13. As regards the income of the deceased, since 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/-. - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 14. Since the deceased was aged 60 year old and was self- employed. 10% requires to be added to the monthly income towards future prospects, which would result in the income to be Rs.13,750/-. 15. As held above 50% requires to be deducted towards personal expenses, which would result in the income to be Rs.6,875/-. The income of the deceased for the purposes of determining the loss of dependency would thus be Rs.6,875/-. 16. As the deceased was aged 60 years, a multiplier of '9' would have to be applied. 17. Consequently, the claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.7,42,500/- (Rs.11,667/- x 12 x 9) towards “loss of dependency”. 18. The claimants, being sons and daughter, each would be entitled to a sum of Rs.48,400/- towards “loss of consortium” , in all Rs.1,45,200 and they would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.36,300/- under the “conventional heads”. - 11 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 19. 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 7,42,500 2. Loss of Consortium 1,45,200 3. Conventional Heads 36,300 Total 9,24,000 20. Consequently, the claimants would be entitled for compensation of Rs.9,24,000 /- as against Rs.1,50,000/- 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. 21. The KSRTC 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. 22. The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the Tribunal. - 12 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010358082020 NC: 2026:KHC:38640 MFA No. 4903 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 4944 of 2020 23. The claimants are entitled for equal proportion of the amount of compensation, which shall be released to them on proper identification and verification. In the result, the appeal of the claimants and the appeal of the KSRTC are allowed in part. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1