- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1306 OF 2021(MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE C.CHANDRAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, 2. SHRI C.KIRAN S/O LATE C.CHANDRAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 3. KUMARI C.CHAITRA D/O LATE C.CHANDAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, 4. KUMARI SUPRIYA D/O LATE C.CHANDRAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS, 5. SMT.LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE CHINAPPA NOW AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, 4TH MINOR APPELLANT IS REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN/MOTHER 1ST APPELLANT HEREIN ALL ARE RESIDING AT WARD NO.20, SAMATHANAGAR, Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 NEAR RAILWAY STATION, MALUR-563 130. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. GOPAL KRISHNA N, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI YOGANANDA S/O KEMPEGOWDA MAJOR BY AGE R/AT NO.45, NAT ROAD, GANDHI BAZAAR, BENGALURU-560 004. 2. SHRI AFREEZ KHAN S/O BASHEER KHAN MAJOR BY AGE, RESIDING AT KRISHNARAJAPURA VILLAGE, MASTHI HOBLI, MALUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT-563 130 3. SHRI SRINIVAS A.M. S/O MUNIYAPPA MAJOR BY AGE, RESIDING AT ARALERI VILLAGE & POST, MALUR TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT-563 101 4. THE IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD SRI SHANTHI TOWERS, 5TH FLOOR, NO.141, 3RD MAIN, EAST TO NGEF LAYOUT, KASTURINAGAR, BENGALURU-560043 REP BY ITS MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C. SHANKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2, SRI. B.C. SHIVANNEGOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R4 NOTICE TO R1 & R3 DISPENSED WITH) - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.01.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1089/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU , 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 The claimants have filed this appeal challenging the judgment and award passed in MVC No.1089/2017 dated 18.01.2018 by the III Addl. Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-18) (for short, 'the Tribunal'), whereby the Tribunal passed the following order: "ORDER The claim petition filed by the petitioners U/S 166 of MV Act as against the respondent No.1 is hereby dismissed. The claim petition filed by the petitioners U/S 166 of MV Act as against the respondent No.2 to 4 is hereby partly allowed with costs. The petitioners are entitled for compensation of Rs.11,66,840/- with interest @ 9% P.A. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. There is composite negligence on the part of the rider of the Motor Cycle bearing No.KA-02-EP- - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 8318 and the rider of the Motor Cycle bearing No.KA-08-Q-6407 to an extent of 50% each. As there is no policy coverage of the vehicle bearing No.KA-02-EP-8318, so The respondent No.2 is liable to pay the compensation to the extent of 50%. The respondents No.3 and 4 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the extent of 50%. In view of the valid insurance policy in respect of the Motor Cycle bearing No.KA-08-Q- 6407, the respondent No.4, being the insurer, is liable to pay the compensation to the petitioners to the extent of 50%. The respondents No.2 and 4 are liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till its realization within a period of two months from the date of this order. Out of the compensation amount awarded to the petitioners, petitioner No.2 is entitled to Rs.10,000/-. Out of the remaining compensation amount, petitioner No.1 is entitled to 60%, petitioner No.3 is entitled to 10%, petitioner No.4 is entitled to 20% and petitioner No.5 is entitled to 10%. With regard to the compensation amount together with interest payable to petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.3, 40% With regard to the compensation amount together with interest payable to petitioner Nos.1 and 3, 40% of the amount shall be deposited in any Nationalized/Scheduled Bank of their choice for a period of three years and the remaining 60% shall be released to them through account payee cheque on proper identification. The petitioners are at liberty to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on the deposit amount from time to time. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 With regard to the compensation amount together with interest payable to petitioner No.4, the entire amount shall be deposited in the name of the petitioner in any Nationalized/Scheduled Bank till she attains the age of majority and, on attaining majority, the entire amount shall be released to her through account payee cheque on proper identification without any further proceedings. The guardian of the petitioner is at liberty to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on the deposit amount from time to time. With regard to the compensation amount together with interest payable to petitioner Nos.2 and 5, the entire amount shall be released to them through account payee cheque on proper identification without any further proceedings." 2. The brief facts of the case are, on 30.07.2016 at about 06:30 p.m., the deceased in this case i.e., C. Chandrappa was proceeding in a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-08-Q-6407 as a pillion rider from Masti towards Malur, ridden by one Seenu on Masti-Malur road. When they reached near Byragimatta curve, Malur Taluk, Kolar District, another motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-02-EP- 8318 came from opposite direction and there was a head-on collision between both the motorcycles on the middle of the road. Due to the collision between the motorcycles, Chandrappa knocked down and sustained grievous injuries and - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 on the way to Government Hospital, Malur, he succumbed to the injuries. Later, the legal representatives of the deceased filed the claim petition claiming compensation for the accidental death of deceased. 3. The Tribunal, upon assessment of oral and documentary evidence, partly allowed the claim petition as stated supra. The said judgment is challenged in this appeal by the claimants. 4. Heard learned counsel Sri Gopal Krishna N. for the appellants, learned counsel Sri C. Shankar Reddy for respondent No.2 and learned counsel Sri B.C. Shivannegowda for respondent No.4-Insurnace Company. 5. Apart from urging several contentions, learned counsel for the appellants-claimants contended that since the deceased was traveling in motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-08-Q-6407 as a pillion rider, no negligence could be fixed against him and the claimants are at liberty to claim compensation either one of the joint tortfeasor as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Khenyei v. - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 New India Insurance Company Limited and Others - (2015) 9 SCC 273, as such, the Tribunal is not justified in directing the Insurance Company to pay compensation to the extent to 50% to the claimants. According to him, the Tribunal ought to have directed the Insurance Company to pay the entire compensation to the claimants by reserving a liberty to the Insurance Company to recover 50% of the compensation from the owner/insured of the offending motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-02-EP-8318, since the said motorcycle was not having valid insurance policy as on the date of accident. He further contended that the Tribunal has erred in awarding meager compensation without considering the appropriate avocation, income, and age of the deceased. He also contented that the Tribunal was not justified in awarding compensation on the heads of loss of consortium and loss of estate. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal. 6. Learned counsel for respondent No.4-Insurance Company of the vehicle in which the deceased was traveling i.e., KA-08-Q-6407 contended that the Tribunal is justified in attributing 50% negligence on the riders of both the - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 motorcycles by considering the manner in which the accident occurred and by placing reliance on the investigation papers produced by the claimants, more particularly, Ex.P3-sketch, Ex.P2-spot mahazar and Ex.P7-charge sheet. He further contented that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the entire compensation to the claimants in view of the non coverage of insurance policy to the offending vehicle and thereafter to recover 50% of the compensation amount. He also contended that the Tribunal is justified in awarding just compensation under all heads. He further contended that the claimants dispensed the notice to the owner of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-08-Q-6407, as such, unless the owner of motorcycle is liable to pay the compensation, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation. With these submissions, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 7. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions 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 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 8. As could be gathered from records, the occurrence of accident and death of deceased in the said accident are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the motorcycle in which the deceased was travelling was covered with valid insurance policy of respondent No.4-Insurance Company. No doubt, the insured of the said vehicle was placed ex-parte before the Tribunal. However, in view of the valid insurance policy, the Insurance Company cannot escape from the liability on that count. 9. Admittedly, the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-02-EP-3818 was not covered with the valid insurance policy. The Tribunal, upon perusal of evidence on record and investigation documents at Exs.P2 and P3 coupled with the evidence of PWs.1, 2 and RW.1, held that the riders of both the motorcycles equally contributed negligence for the accident, since it was head on collision, as such, saddled the negligence on the riders of both the motorcycle at 50% each. Upon re-appreciation of evidence and reasoning of the Tribunal, I find no good ground to interfere in the said finding of the Tribunal, since the accident was head on collision in the middle of the - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 road, as such, both the riders of the motorcycle equally contributed negligence to the accident. 10. The Tribunal has directed that the owner of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-02-EP-3818 is liable to pay 50% of the compensation amount, since the said vehicle was not covered with the insurance policy. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that respondent No.2 was not the owner at the time of accident and respondent No.1 was the RC owner is concerned, the ownership was not seriously disputed by respondent No.2 before the Tribunal. Accordingly, the finding of the Tribunal that respondent No.2 was the owner of the motorcycle does not call for any interference. 11. On careful perusal of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Khenyei stated supra in paragraph Nos. 22.1 to 22.3 reads as under: "22.1. In the case of composite negligence, the plaintiff/claimant is entitled to sue both or any one of the joint tortfeasors and to recover the entire compensation as liability of joint tortfeasors is joint and several. - 11 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 22.2. In the case of composite negligence, apportionment of compensation between two tortfeasors vis-à-vis the plaintiff/claimant is not permissible. He can recover at his option whole damages from any of them. 22.3. In case all the joint tortfeasors have been impleaded and evidence is sufficient, it is open to the court/Tribunal to determine inter se extent of composite negligence of the drivers. However, determination of the extent of negligence between the joint tortfeasors is only for the purpose of their inter se liability so that one may recover the sum from the other after making whole of the payment to the plaintiff/claimant to the extent it has satisfied the liability of the other. In case both of them have been impleaded and the apportionment/extent of their negligence has been determined by the court/Tribunal, in the main case one joint tortfeasor can recover the amount from the other in the execution proceedings." 12. Collocating the findings of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the above judgment to the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the considered view that the said finding aptly applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case and the claimants can recover the compensation amount from any of the joint tortfeasor. In the instant case, since the motorcycle in which the deceased was travelling was covered with valid insurance policy, the claimants are entitled to recover the entire compensation amount from respondent No.4- - 12 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 Insurance Company. However, respondent No.4, after making good the said amount to the claimants, is at liberty to recover the same from respondent No.2-owner of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-02-EP-3818. Accordingly, the direction of the Tribunal to pay the compensation is modified. 13. 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 at Rs.7,500/-. 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 2016, would be Rs.9,500/-. 14. he 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 1/4th has to be deducted towards personal expenses. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to a sum of - 13 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 Rs.12,22,650/- (9,500 + 10% X 12 X 13 X 3/4) towards “loss of dependency”. 15. The claimants, being the wife, son, daughters and mother of the deceased, they would each be entitled to a sum of Rs.48,400/- towards “loss of consortium” i.e., in all Rs.2,42,000/- ( 48,400 x 5) and they would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.36,300/- under the “conventional heads”. 16. Thus, the claimants, in modification of the impugned award, would be entitled to the following sums: Sl. No. Particulars Amount (In Rs.) 1. Towards loss of dependency 12,22,650 2. Towards loss of consortium 2,42,000 3. Towards loss of estate 36,300 Total 15,00,950 17. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for total compensation of Rs.15,00,950/- as against Rs.11,66,840/-. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. However, in view of the order dated 19.01.2024, the claimants- - 14 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010211902020 NC: 2026:KHC:39735 MFA No. 1306 of 2021 appellants are not entitled for interest for the delayed period of 685 days in filing this appeal. 18. Respondent No.4-Insurance Company is directed to make good the entire payment to the claimants within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, however, is at liberty to recover 50% of the amount from respondent No.2-owner of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-02-EP-3818. 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. Pending I.As., if any, stand disposed of. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE HKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5