- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18882-DB MFA No. 8121 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8121 OF 2025 (MV-D) BETWEEN: MAHESH KUMAR S AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS S/O SHEKAR R/AT NO.371, CHIKKAMALAPURA VILLAGE, LOKKANAHALLI HOBLI, HANUR TALUK-571 439 CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT &APPELLANT (BY SRI. ARAVIND REDDY.H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. RAJAMMA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, W/O LATE MAHADEVA, R/AT SATTHEGALA, AGRAHARA VILLAGE, PALYA HOBLI, KOLLEGAL TALUK - 571 440. CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT 2. MAHADEVA PRASAD AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18882-DB MFA No. 8121 of 2025 S/O LATE MAHADEVA, R/AT SATTHEGALA, AGRAHARA VILLAGE, PALYA HOBLI, KOLLEGAL TALUK - 571 440 CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT 3. VARUN M AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, S/O LATE MAHADEVA, R/AT SATTHEGALA, AGRAHARA VILLAGE, PALYA HOBLI, KOLLEGAL TALUK - 571 440 CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RANGANATHA PRASAD.B.S., ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.02.05.2025 PASSED IN MVC NO. 189/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, KOLLEGALA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.23,10,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALIZATION AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18882-DB MFA No. 8121 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The appellant is the respondent before the Tribunal, is before this Court questioning the quantum of compensation awarded to the claimants under impugned judgment and award dated 02.05.2025 in MVC.No.189/2024 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Kollegala. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the claimants filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation for the accidental death of one Mahadeva in a road traffic accident that occurred on 07.04.2024 involving motorbike bearing Reg.No.KA-10-U-7146 and Maruthi Swift Car bearing Reg.No.KA-03-MF-4375. It is stated that the deceased-Mahadeva was working as a mason, earning a sum of Rs.30,000/- per month. It is stated that the deceased was aged nearly 46 years as on the date of accident. 3. The respondent i.e., appellant herein appeared before the Tribunal and filed his objections contending that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the motorcycle by the deceased himself and there is no negligence - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18882-DB MFA No. 8121 of 2025 on the part of the driver of the Swift Car. Further, the respondent denied the age, occupation and income of the deceased. Thus, he prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. 4. The claimants in support of their claim, examined PWs.1 and 2, apart from marking documents at Exs.P1 to P8. The respondent examined RW.2, apart from marking documents at Exs.R1 and R2. 5. The Tribunal on scrutiny of the material on record, awarded total compensation of Rs.23,10,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal determined the notional income of the deceased at Rs.16,500/- per month, added 25% of the assessed income towards future prospects, deducted 1/3rd towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. The Tribunal also awarded Rs.44,000/- towards consortium to each of the claimants and Rs.16,500/- was awarded towards funeral and obsequies ceremony and further Rs.16,500/- was awarded on the head of loss of estate. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18882-DB MFA No. 8121 of 2025 6. The respondent-owner of the offending vehicle is before this Court in this appeal contending that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on higher side. Thus, he prays for allowing the appeal. 7. Learned counsel Sri. H.Aravind Reddy appearing for the appellant-owner of the offending vehicle would submit that the Tribunal committed an error in assessing notional income of the deceased-Mahadeva at Rs.16,500/- per month and he submits that the Tribunal ought to have assessed notional income at Rs.15,000/- per month. Further, learned counsel would submit that the claimants have not placed on record any material to establish the income of the deceased and in that circumstances assessing the income at Rs.16,500/- per month is on higher side. Learned counsel would submit that the deceased was aged more than 50 years as on the date of accident but the Tribunal without there being any material, assessed the age of the deceased at 46 years and added 25% of the assessed income towards future prospects. On the above two grounds, learned counsel for the appellant prays for allowing the appeal and to reduce compensation. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18882-DB MFA No. 8121 of 2025 8. Learned counsel Sri. Ranganatha Prasad.B.S. for the respondents-claimants supports the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and further submits that the notional income for the year 2024 is Rs.16,500/- as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and the Tribunal is justified in assessing the said income. Learned counsel would further submit that though the appellant had taken contention that the age of the deceased was more than 50 years as on the date of accident, the said contention is not substantiated by any proof. Thus, learned counsel would pray for dismissal of the appeal. 9. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the entire appeal papers, the following points would arise for consideration: (i) Whether the Tribunal is justified in assessing the notional income of the deceased at Rs.16,500/- per month? (ii) Whether the Tribunal is justified in taking the age of the deceased at 46 years? - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18882-DB MFA No. 8121 of 2025 Answer to both the above points would be in the 'Affirmative' for the following reasons: 10. The accident occurred on 07.04.2024 involving motorbike bearing Reg.No.KA-10-U-7146 and Maruthi Swift Car bearing Reg.No.KA-03-MF-4375 and the accidental death of husband of first claimant is not in dispute in this appeal. The respondent-owner of the offending Swift Car is before this Court questioning only the quantum of compensation awarded to the claimants. 11. The claimants have stated that the deceased was doing mason work and was earning Rs.30,000/- per month as income. However, the claimants have not placed any material to establish the income claimed. In the said circumstances, the Tribunal assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.16,500/- per month. 12. In terms of the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, for the accident of the year 2024, the notional income would be Rs.16,500/- per month and the Tribunal is justified in assessing the notional income at - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18882-DB MFA No. 8121 of 2025 Rs.16,500/- per month. We do not find any error in the determination of income by the Tribunal. 13. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the deceased was aged more than 50 years as on the date of accident and the Tribunal committed an error in assessing the age of the deceased at 46 years. The Tribunal based on the material on record including post mortem report-Ex.P7 and Aadhaar card of deceased-Ex.P8, has rightly come to the conclusion that the deceased was aged 46 years as on the date of accident and added 25% of the assessed income towards future prospects. The respondent-owner of the offending vehicle has not placed on record any material to prove the contention that the deceased was aged more than 50 years as the date of accident. When the Tribunal has determined the age of the deceased at 46 years based on Exs.P7 and P8, there is no material to differ with the same. 14. There is no merit in the appeal and accordingly, appeal stands dismissed. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18882-DB MFA No. 8121 of 2025 The amount in deposit be transmitted to the Tribunal. In view of the disposal of the appeal, pending I.As do not survive for consideration. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE SMJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3