- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 8682 OF 2024 (MV-D) BETWEEN: M/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, No.18, KRISHI BHAVAN 5TH AND 6TH FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, OPP. HUDSON CHURCH NEAR CORPORATION CIRCLE BENGALURU -560 001. REPRESENTED BY VAISAKH MOHAN ASSISTANT MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. GEETHA R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI S KAMAL BASHA S/O LATE. INAITULLA AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS. 2. SMT. S. NASEEMA, W/O S. KAMAL BHASHA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS. 3. MISS. S. NIHA D/O. S. KAMAL BASHA AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS. Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 4. MISS. S. SUMIYA D/O. S. KAMAL BASHA AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS 5. MASTER. S. MALIK S/O S. KAMAL BASHA AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS. ALL ARE RESIDING AT No.4-6234-1, NEELLAKUNTA PALAMANER, VTC; NEELLAKUNTA CHITTOOR DISTRICT ANDHARA PRADESH - 517 408. 6. MR.B. NANDHA KUMAR, S/O. BABU, MAJOR RESIDING AT No.7, 3RD MAIN ROAD RAJIV GANDHI NAGAR ALLAPURAM VELLORE- 632 002. TAMIL NADU …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. SUSHMITHA G, ADVOCATE FOR SRI GOPAL KRISHNA N, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5 R6 NANDHA KUMAR -SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:04.10.2024 PASSED IN MVC No.5411/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES AND ACJM, MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-5), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.23,60,200/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is filed by the insurer challenging the judgment and award dated 04.10.2024 passed in MVC No. 5411/2022 by the VIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Cause and MACT, (SCCH-5), Bengaluru. 2. Even though the matter is listed for `Admission’ today, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 5 it is taken up for disposal. 3. Claimants – respondent Nos. 1 to 5 made a claim petition praying to award compensation for the death of S. Mubarak in a road traffic accident that occurred on 05.09.2022 contending that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the lorry bearing registration No. TN-25-AZ-9355. The Tribunal after recording evidence, appreciating the evidence on record, assessed the compensation and awarded compensation under different heads as under: - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 SL.No. Head of Compensation Amount 1. Loss of dependency 22,30,200-00 2. Loss of filial consortium (Rs.20,000/- each to Petitioner No.1 to 5) 1,00,000-00 3. Loss of Estate 15,000-00 4. Funeral Expenses 15,000-00 Total 23,60,200-00 4. The Tribunal has also awarded interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from date of petition till the date of realization and directed appellant – Insurer to deposit the said award amount with interest. Appellant – Insurer challenging the whole negligence saddled on the driver of offending vehicle and also quantum of compensation has filed the present appeal. 5. Heard learned counsel for appellant – Insurer and learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 5 – claimants. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 6. Learned counsel for appellant – Insurer would contend that the insured vehicle was parked on the left side of the road and the deceased drove his motorcycle and dashed against the parked vehicle. There was enough space for the deceased to move by the side of the parked vehicle. Considering the said aspect, there is contributory negligence on the part of the deceased also. She further contends that the claimants are residents of Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh State, the accident occurred in Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh State and therefore, notional income fixed in Andhra Pradesh State has to be taken into consideration for award of `loss of dependency’. With this, she prayed to allow the appeal. 7. Learned counsel appearing for claimants – respondent Nos.1 to 5 would contend that the accident occurred at 10.45 p.m., i.e, in the night hours, lorry was parked on the road, it was not visible in the night hours and as a result of it the deceased dashed against the parked lorry. There were no indicators to indicate the - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 parking of the lorry on the road. Considering the said aspect the Tribunal has rightly held that the accident occurred due to the sole negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry. More so, charge sheet has been filed against the driver of the lorry. On that point she placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sushma vs. Nitin Ganapati Rangole & Others. reported in 2024 INSC 706. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court has perused the judgment, award and trial Court records. 9. The accident occurred on 05.09.2022 at 10.45 pm on a highway. Ex.P.6 – sketch of the spot of accident indicate that the lorry was parked on the road. Ex.P.5 – report of Motor Vehicle Inspector indicate that there is damage to the rare safety guard of the lorry. Ex.P.7 is copy of the charge sheet and it is filed against the driver of the lorry. Hon'ble Apex Court considering similar case in the case of Sushma (supra) has observed as under: “40. On a holistic analysis of the material available on record, it is established beyond the pale - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 of doubt that the offending truck was parked in the middle of the road without any parking lights being switched on and without any markers or indicators being placed around the stationary vehicle so as to warn the incoming vehicular traffic. This omission by the person in control of the said truck was in clear violation of law. The accident took place on a highway where the permissible speed limits are fairly high. In such a situation, it would be imprudent to hold that the driver of a vehicle, travelling through the highway in the dead of the night in pitch dark conditions, would be able to make out a stationary vehicle lying in the middle of the road within a reasonable distance so as to apply the brakes and avoid the collision. The situation would be compounded by the headlights of the vehicles coming from the opposite direction and make the viewing of the stationary vehicle even more difficult. Thus, the conclusion drawn by the Courts below that the driver of the car could have averted the accident by applying the brakes and hence, he was equally negligent and contributed to the accident on the application of principle of last opportunity is ex-facie perverse and cannot be sustained.” - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 10. Considering the above aspect it is clear that entire negligence is on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle and the Tribunal has rightly held so. 11. The Tribunal has taken the notional income of the deceased at Rs.14,750/- based on the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Claimants are residents of Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh State. The accident occurred in Chittoor in Andhra Pradesh State. Therefore, notional income taken by the Tribunal fixed for residents of Karnataka State is not proper. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of The Manager vs. Banda Saraswathi, MFA No.5097/2023 decided on 07.04.2026 has observed as under: 7.2 In light of the alternative submission advanced, we refrain from deciding the issue of maintainability and jurisdiction of the claim petition. Having regard to the undisputed facts that the deceased was a resident of the State of Andhra Pradesh, the claimants are also residents of Andhra Pradesh, the accident occurred within the said State and the owner of the offending vehicle is likewise a resident of Andhra Pradesh, we deem it appropriate to adopt - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 the notional income as indicated by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for the purpose of computing compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. As per the chart placed before us, the notional income for an accident of the year 2018 is Rs.7,000/- per month. Accordingly, we assess the notional income at Rs.7,000/- per month.” 12. In the said decision claimants were residents of Andhra Pradesh and the accident had taken place in Andhra Pradesh and the Division Bench of this Court has taken the notional income fixed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for the purpose of awarding compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. Therefore, notional income fixed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh is to be taken into consideration for calculating `loss of dependency’. The notional income fixed for the year 2022 by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh is Rs.9,000/-. The Tribunal has rightly added 40% towards future prospects and deducted 50% towards personal expenses as the deceased was a bachelor and applied multiplier of 18 as he was aged 22 years. Therefore, now taking the notional income as Rs.9,000/- `loss of dependency’ is calculated as under: - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 9000 + 3600 (40%) = 12600 12600 – 50% = 6300 6300 X 12 X 18 = 13,60,800/- 13. The Tribunal has awarded filial consortium of Rs.20,000/- each to the claimant Nos.1 to 5 in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-. Claimants are parents, sisters and brother of the deceased. Therefore, they are entitled to consortium in a sum of Rs.40,000/- each with 10% escalation as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Vs Pranay Sethi and Others reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157. Claimants are entitled to consortium in a sum of Rs.2,20,000/- (44000 X 5). 14. The Tribunal even though has awarded `loss of estate’ in a sum of Rs.15,000/- and `funeral expenses’ in a sum of Rs.15,000/- has not taken into consideration 10% escalation and therefore, claimants are entitled to `loss of estate’ in a sum of Rs.16,500/- and `funeral expenses’ in a sum of Rs.16,500/-. In view of the above, claimants are entitled to total compensation as under: - 11 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 SL.No. Head of Compensation Amount 1. Loss of dependency 13,60,800-00 2. Loss of filial consortium 2,20,000-00 3. Loss of Estate 16,500-00 4. Funeral Expenses 16,500-00 Total 16,13,800-00 15. Claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.16,13,800/- as against Rs.23,60,200/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from date of petition till the date of realization. Appellant - Insurer is liable to pay the said compensation with interest. 16. In view of the above, the following; O R D E R i) Appeal is allowed in part. ii) Claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.16,13,800/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from date of petition till the date of realization. - 12 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010756542024 NC: 2026:KHC:39659 MFA No. 8682 of 2024 iii) Appellant – Insurer is directed to deposit the entire compensation with interest before the Tribunal within six weeks from this day. iv) Share of compensation among the claimants as determined by the Tribunal and also deposit of compensation remain unaltered. v) Amount in deposit is ordered to be transmitted to the Tribunal. Sd/- (SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE LRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49 Ct.sm