- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010254792022 NC: 2026:KHC:39935 MFA No. 4233 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4233 OF 2022(MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS 2. RAJU T V @ RAJU S/O LATE VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS ALL ARE RESIDING AT 1ST CROSS, 1ST MAIN ROAD, SRINIVASANAGARA PATTEGARAPALYA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. NAIK KRISHNA VENKATRAMAN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COM LTD, 5TH AND 6TH FLOOR KRISHI BHAVAN BUILDING, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU 560 001 (TRACTOR AND TRAILER REG NO KA-06-TB-4787-4788) 2. MADHUSUDHAN Y P S/O PRAKASH, MAJOR, Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010254792022 NC: 2026:KHC:39935 MFA No. 4233 of 2022 R/AT NO YACHANAHALLI AMRUTHURU HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT, (TRACTOR AND TRAILER REG NO KA-06-TB-4787-4788 POLICY HOLDER) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G S MARULAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R1, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.03.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO. 6464/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE 12TH ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND A.C.M.M., SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, BENGALURU (SCCH-8), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT The claimants, being dissatisfied with the compensation of Rs.7,74,400/- awarded by the Tribunal in MVC No.6464/2019 dated 22.03.2022, are in appeal. 2. The brief facts of the case are, Sri Venkatesh (deceased) was proceeding in his motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-05-JF-3955 near Yachanahalli, SH-84 towards Amruthuru, at that time, the driver of Tractor-Trailer bearing registration No.KA-06-TB-4787 and KA-06-TB-4788 - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010254792022 NC: 2026:KHC:39935 MFA No. 4233 of 2022 was stationed the Tractor-Trailer in the middle of the road without any indicator or parking light. As such, the deceased was unable to control his motorcycle and dashed against the rear portion of the Trailer. Due to the impact, the deceased thrown out from the motorcycle and sustained severe injuries. Though he was shifted to Government Hospital, Kunigal, the Doctor declared him as brought dead. Subsequently, the legal representatives of deceased-Venkatesh filed claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation for his accidental death. 3. The Tribunal, upon appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, partly allowed the claim petition as stated supra. However, the Tribunal fastened 20% contributory negligence on the part of the deceased for the accident, as such, ordered that the deceased is entitled for compensation of Rs.7,74,400/- with 9% interest per annum. The said judgment is challenged by the claimants in this appeal. 4. Heard learned counsel Sri Naik Krishna Venkataraman and learned counsel Sri G.S. Marulaiah for respondent No.1. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010254792022 NC: 2026:KHC:39935 MFA No. 4233 of 2022 5. Apart from urging several contentions, learned counsel for the claimants-appellants contended that the Tribunal has grossly erred in fastening 20% negligence on the deceased. According to him, the Tractor-Trailer was stationed on the middle of the road and suddenly proceeded in a reverse direction without any indicator. As such, the deceased left with no other option, dashed against the rear portion of the Trailer. By placing reliance on Ex.P5-sketch and Ex.P3-spot mahazar he submits that the driver of the Tractor-Trailer contributed entire negligence for the accident. However, the Tribunal without appreciating the investigation papers and evidence of PW.1, saddled 20% negligence on the deceased. Hence, he prays to set-aside the said finding of the Tribunal. 6. He further contended that the Tribunal has also erred in granting meager compensation on all heads without properly considering the age, avocation and income of the deceased so also on the head of loss of consortium and loss of estate. With these submissions, he prays to allow the appeal. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company contended that the Tribunal is justified in fastening - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010254792022 NC: 2026:KHC:39935 MFA No. 4233 of 2022 20% negligence on the deceased. According to him, on perusal of Ex.P5-sketch, the driver of Tractor-Trailer was proceeding in a reverse direction by applying indicator, whereas the deceased, without observing the same, came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the rear portion of the Trailer. According to him, it is the duty of the rider of the motorcycle to maintain sufficient distance from the vehicle proceeding ahead of his vehicle in a highway road. He further contended that the Tribunal is justified in awarding just compensation. Accordingly, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the impugned judgment and award so also the other documents made available before this Court. 9. As could be gathered from records, occurrence of accident and death of deceased in the said accident are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the offending Tractor- Trailer was covered with insurance policy of respondent No.1. After the accident, the jurisdictional Police registered FIR at Ex.P1 based on the strength of complaint lodged by the son of - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010254792022 NC: 2026:KHC:39935 MFA No. 4233 of 2022 deceased against the driver of Tractor-Trailer. After investigation, the said Police laid charge sheet against the driver of Tractor-Trailer at Ex.P13. 10. On perusal of Ex.P5-sketch and Ex.P3-spot mahazar it could be presumed that the driver of Tractor-Trailer suddenly moved the Tractor-Trailer in a reverse direction without following traffic rules and without applying indicator. However, the deceased also rode his motorcycle without observing the movement of the vehicle ahead of his vehicle in the State Highway. The Tribunal, while appreciating the evidence has observed that the deceased also rode his motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner at the time of accident. If the deceased rode his motorcycle in a moderate speed by observing the movement of the vehicle in front of him, he would have easily avoided the accident. In such circumstances, though major negligence was contributed by the driver of Tractor-Trailer, at the same time, the deceased also contributed minimum negligence for the accident, the same can be reassessed to the extent of 15% instead of 20% in respect of deceased and 85% negligence on the driver of Tractor-Trailer instead of 80%. - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010254792022 NC: 2026:KHC:39935 MFA No. 4233 of 2022 11. As far as the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is concerned, in order to arrive at the loss of dependency, the Tribunal has determined the monthly income of the deceased notionally at Rs.10,000/-. Since there is no credible documentary 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 2019, would be Rs.14,000/-. 12. As the deceased was aged 50 years, a multiplier of '13' would have to be applied and as he was self-employed, 10% requires to be added to his monthly income towards future prospects and 1/3rd has to be deducted towards personal expenses. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.16,01,600/- (14,000 + 10% X 12 X 13 X 2/3) towards “loss of dependency”. 13. The claimants, being the wife and son of the deceased, they would each be entitled to a sum of Rs.48,400/- towards “loss of consortium” i.e., in all Rs.96,800/- (48,400 x - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010254792022 NC: 2026:KHC:39935 MFA No. 4233 of 2022 2) 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 16,01,600 2. Loss of Consortium 96,800 3. Conventional Heads 36,300 Sub-Total 17,34,700 (-)15% contributory negligence of the deceased 2,60,205 Total 14,74,495 15. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.14,74,495/- as against Rs.7,44,400/- awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. 16. Respondent No.1-Insurance Company 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. - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010254792022 NC: 2026:KHC:39935 MFA No. 4233 of 2022 The apportionment of compensation amount shall be in terms of the award of the Tribunal. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10