- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9751 OF 2012 (MV-D) C/W MFA CROSS OBJECTION NO. 96 OF 2014 IN MFA No. 9751/2012: BETWEEN: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., SRINIVAS COMPLEX, A S ROAD KARKALA, UDUPI DISTRICT BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., JEWEL PLAZA, 1ST FLOOR MARUTHI VEETHIKA, UDUPI-576 101 BY ITS MANAGER …APPELLANT (BY SRI. O MAHESH., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SUSHEELA ACHARYA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS W/O LATE NARAYANA ACHARYA ASHRAYA NIVAS , NELLIKATTE HIRGANA VILLAGE, KARKALA TQ., UDUPI DISTRICT-576 101. DEAD BY HER LRS 1A. SRI. GOPALA ACHARYA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 S/O LATE SUSHILA ACHARYA, 1B. SMT. LAKSHMI ACHARYA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, D/O LATE SUSHILA ACHARYA, 1C. SMT. SHYAMALA ACHARYA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, D/O LATE SUSHILA ACHARYA, ALL ARE RESIDING AT ‘ASHRAYA NIVA’, NELLIKATTE, HIRGANA VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI-576 117. 2. G SURESH ACHARYA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS S/O G SUBRAYA ACHARYA ‘KARVAL HOUSE’, GOVINDOOR YERLAPADY VILLAGE, KARKALA TQ., UDUPI DISTRICT-576 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYA KRISHNA BHAT M., ADVOCATE FOR R1, V/O DTD: 04.12.2012 NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 3.8.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.1070/2011 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & AMACT, KARKALA, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.3,85,486/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALIZATION. IN MFA.CROB NO. 96/2014: BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SUSHEELA ACHARYA DEAD BY HER LRS - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 1A. SRI. GOPALA ACHARYA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, S/O LATE SUSHILA ACHARYA, 1B. SMT. LAKSHMI ACHARYA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, D/O LATE SUSHILA ACHARYA, 1C. SMT. SHYAMALA ACHARYA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, D/O LATE SUSHILA ACHARYA, ALL ARE RESIDING AT ‘ASHRAYA NIVA’, NELLIKATTE, HIRGANA VILLAGE, KARKALA TALUK, UDUPI-576 117. ...CROSS OBJECTORS (BY SRI. VIJAYA KRISHNA BHAT M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI G SURESH ACHARYA S/O G SUBRAYA ACHARYA AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS KARVAL HOUSE, GOVINDOOR YERLAPADY VILLAGE KARKALA TALUK UDUPI DISTRICT. 2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., SRINIVASA COMPLEX A S ROAD, KARKALA UDUPI DISTRICT-574 201 REP. BY IT’S MANAGER ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. O. MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2, V/O DTD: 28.07.2026 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 THIS MFA CROB IN MFA NO.9751/2012 FILED U/O 41, RULE 22 OF CPC, R/W SEC 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 3.8.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.1070/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AMACT, KARKALA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 05.08.2026 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, P SREE SUDHA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA CAV JUDGMENT M.F.A. No.9751 of 2012 and M.F.A. Cr. Ob. No.96 of 2014 are filed against the judgment and award dated 03.08.2012 passed by Senior Civil Judge and AMACT, Karkala, in M.V.C. No.1070 of 2011. 2. One Udaya Acharya met with an accident on 15.01.2010 and died subsequently. His mother filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.15 lakhs. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record, granted an amount - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 of Rs.3,85,486/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from date of petition till realisation. 3. Aggrieved with the said order, United India Insurance Company Limited preferred M.F.A. No.9751 of 2012 stating that there was a delay of 3 days in filing the complaint. The brother of Udaya Acharya (deceased) was involved in the accident and he was shown as an eyewitness. The hospital, in which the deceased was treated, has not informed the jurisdictional police about the MLC. There was no compliance of mandatory provisions of Section 134(C) of the MV Act either by the insured or Section 158(6) both by the insured or concerned Investigating Officer. It is contended that the Tribunal ought to have seen damages found on respective vehicles under Exhibit P5, to belie the manner in which the accident occurred. But the Tribunal granted excessive amounts. The claimant did not choose to enter into the witness box and she examined her other son, which clearly shows that the claimant was not entirely dependent on Udaya Acharya. It is contended that the Tribunal has erred in taking the income of Udaya Acharya as - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 Rs.5,000/- per month and 50% towards future prospects. Thus, requested to set aside the order of the Tribunal. 4. M.F.A. Cr.Ob. No.96 of 2014 is filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation. It is contended that Udaya Acharya was aged 26 years working as a goldsmith and earning Rs.15,000/- per month at the time of the accident. But the Tribunal has taken lesser income and 50% of it was deducted towards personal expenses. It is contended that the claimant spent huge medical expenses, but the Tribunal granted only Rs.40,486/-, which is on the lower side. The amount granted by the Tribunal under the other heads is meagre and interest is to be granted at the rate of 12% per annum. Therefore, requested for enhancement of compensation. 5. Heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing for both sides. 6. The Insurance Company disputed the manner of accident and also involvement of the vehicle. The manner of the accident shows that while Udaya Acharya was riding motorcycle bearing No.KA-20-U-5255, at that time, the rider of - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 another motorcycle bearing No.KA-20-K818 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed Udaya Acharya. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries and died subsequently. Notice was issued to respondent No.1 before the Tribunal, but he remained absent and set ex-parte. Respondent No.2-insurance company, in their counter disputed the rash and negligence and it was stated that accident occurred due to the negligence of the deceased Udaya Acharya. Riders of both the cycles had no valid and effective driving licence. Insurance company admitted that they issued a policy for motor cycle bearing No.KA-19-K-0828. In Exhibit P6, the driver of the vehicle was shown as Ashok Anchan and the driving licence was valid till 04.04.2013. P.W.1 filed Exhibit P6 and it shows the driver of the vehicle. Therefore, it is for the petitioner-claimant to prove the manner of accident, involvement of the vehicle, rash and negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle. Petitioner examined her other son as PW1 and filed as Exhibits P1 to P10. Out of which, Exhibits P1 to P5 are related to the accident. Respondents have not examined any witnesses on their behalf and they have not filed any documents. - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 7. The learned counsel of the Insurance Company argued that PM report is not produced and there is no nexus between injuries sustained by the deceased in the accident and the death. Udaya Acharya met with an accident on 15.01.2010 and died on 24.01.2010 i.e. 9 days after the accident. As Udaya Acharya sustained various head injuries, he died on 24.01.2010 and the cause of death is shown as Cranio-Cerbral injuries as a result of blunt force Trauma to the head injury. Merely, because post mortem is not conducted, it cannot be said that there was no nexus between the injuries sustained by him in the accident and death. As he died within 9 days from the date of the accident, the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation. Therefore, the appeal filed by the insurance company has no merits and is liable to be dismissed. 8. Though it is stated that Udaya Acharya was aged 26 years and was a goldsmith and earning Rs.15,000/- per month, the claimant has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2010, his notional income of Rs.5,500/- per month is to be taken as per the chart prepared by - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Udaya Acharya was aged 26 years and the relevant multiplier is 17. He was a bachelor and therefore, and 40% is to be added towards future prospects as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi1 and 50% is to be deducted towards personal expenses as per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation2. Thus, the loss of dependency comes to Rs.8,31,600/- (5,500+40%x12x18-50%). The petitioner is the mother of Udaya Acharya and she is entitled for Rs.40,000/- for filial consortium, as per the guidelines of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram Alias Chuhru Ram & others3, and in the case of United India Insurance Company Limited vs. Satinder Kaur @ Satwinder Kaur and others4. She is also entitled for Rs.30,000/- under conventional heads as per the judgment of 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 2 (2009) 6 SCC 121 3 (2018) 18 SCC 130 4 (2020) 9 SCC 644 - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi5. Thus, the total amount comes to Rs.9,01,600/- with interest at 6% per annum as against Rs.3,85,486/- awarded by the Tribunal. 9. But, during the pendency of the appeal, the claimant died and her son and daughter were brought on record as legal heirs. Therefore, the legal heirs of deceased petitioner Susheela Acharya are entitled for compensation. 10. In the result, the following order is passed: (i) M.F.A. No.9751 of 2012 filed by the insurance company is dismissed. (ii) M.F.A. Cr.Ob. No.96 of 2014 is allowed in part. (iii) The claimants are entitled for total compensation of Rs.9,01,600/- with interest at 6% per annum. (iv) The insurance company already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, they are directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.5,16,114/- within one month from the date of the order. 5 (2017) 16 SCC 680 - 11 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010420362012 NC: 2026:KHC:46033 MFA No. 9751 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 96 of 2014 (v) On such deposit the claimants are permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest equally. (vi) The amount in deposit by the insurance company is to be transferred to the Tribunal. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE CS CT:NR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 61