- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND M.F.A. NO.279/2024 (MV-D) BETWEEN: THE MANAGER RELIANCE GIC. LTD., LAKSHMI TOWERS, NO.1, 6TH CROSS ROAD, 7TH BLOCK, JAYANAGARA, BENGALURU-560 007, NOW REP. BY THE MANAGER, RELIANCE GIC LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.28, EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADV.) AND: 1. PARASAPPA S/O. LATE GUTTEPPA, NOW AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, 2. SMT. DEVAMMA W/O. PARASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT NO.41, CHIKKASHAKUNA VILLAGE, Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 (SORABA), KASABA HOBLI, SORABA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577 429. 3. SMT. JAYASHREE SHENNOY W/O. LATE JAYAPRAKASH SHENNOY, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O. SHREE NIKHETHANA, NEAR OLD SRI. VIJAYA MOTORS, CARRIAGE, OT ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA. 4. GANESH. S S/O. SHIVAPPA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT ITTIGEHALLI VILLAGE, SHIKARIPURA TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.MANJUNATH B BELAGALAD, ADV. FOR R1 & R2 R3 – JAYASHREE SHENNOY – SD V/O DTD 16.04.2024 BRINGING LR'S OF DECEASED R4 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.10.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.491/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ADDITIONAL MACT, XIII, SORABA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.36,81,860/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, 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:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The above appeal filed by the insurance company is directed against the judgment and award dated 20.10.2023 in MVC.No.491/2022 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC & Additional MACT, XIII, Soraba (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) only to the extent of granting quantum of compensation on the head of loss of dependency. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the respondents/parents of the deceased Bharath filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the Act’) seeking compensation of the accidental death of their son in a road traffic accident that took place on 14.08.2021 involving motorbike bearing No.KA-15/X-0069 and a passenger bus bearing registration No.KA-51/AC-7922. It is stated that the deceased was aged 22 years and was earning a sum of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 Rs.24,000/- p.m., as on the date of accident. Further, it is stated that the claimants – parents of the deceased were entirely depending on the income of the deceased. 3. On service of notice, respondent Nos.1 to 3 appeared and respondent Nos.1 and 2 have filed their objections. Respondent No.1 denied the claim petition averments and further contended that the petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties, as the owner of the bike was not made party to the proceedings. The insurer also contended that if at all compensation is granted, requested to award only 6% interest on the award amount. It is also stated that the claim is exorbitant and unreasonable. It also contended that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus. 4. Respondent No.2 in her objections denied the entire averments of the claim petition and further stated - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 that the accident took place solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorbike by the deceased. 5. Before the Tribunal, the claimants to prove their case examined PW1 to PW3 and claimant No.2 examined herself as PW1 apart from marking Ex.P1 to Ex.P24. The respondents examined RW1 and marked Ex.R1 to Ex.R4. 6. The Tribunal on scrutiny of the material on record, awarded total compensation of Rs.36,81,860/- on the following heads: 1 Towards loss of dependency Rs. 36,04,860-00 2 Towards loss of estate Rs. 16,500-00 3 Towards loss of consortium Rs. 44,000-00 4 Towards funeral expenses Rs. 16,500-00 TOTAL Rs. 36,81,860-00 7. While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.24,000/- p.m., placing reliance on Ex.P24. Further, it deducted 50% towards personal expenses of the deceased, since he was bachelor and added 40% of the established income towards future prospects and further - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 awarded a sum of Rs.44,000/- towards loss of consortium and loss of estate at Rs.16,500/- and towards funeral expenses, Rs.16,500/-. 8. Learned counsel for the insurer contended that the Tribunal erred in computing the income of the deceased at Rs.24,000/- p.m., based on Ex.P24 is before this Court in this appeal. 9. Heard learned counsel Sri.B.Pradeep for appellants and learned counsel Sri.Manjunath B. Belagalad for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Perused the entire appeal papers including the Trial Court Records. 10. Learned counsel Sri.B.Pradeep would submit that the Tribunal committed an error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.24,000/- p.m., based on Ex.P24. Learned counsel would invite attention of this Court to Ex.P24 and submits that it is a created document only for the purpose of the case and no other corroborative documents are produced to establish the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 income of the deceased. It is submitted that though PW3 is examined in support of Ex.P24, no license or permission granted to run the Nursery is placed on record. As such, in the absence of any other corroborative document, it is submitted that the Tribunal could not have relied on Ex.P24 to assess the income of the deceased. Thus, he would submit that the Tribunal ought to have taken notional income of Rs.15,000/- in terms of the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority for the year 2021. Thus, he would pray for allowing the appeal, reducing the monthly income of the deceased from Rs.24,000/- p.m., to Rs.15,000/- p.m. 11. Learned counsel for the respondent-Claimants would submit that the deceased was working as labourer in ‘Sri.Harichand Nursery’ and he was receiving a sum of Rs.24,000/- p.m. It is submitted that to establish that deceased was receiving a sum of Rs.24,000/- p.m., as salary, PW3 is examined who is the proprietor of Nursery. It is submitted that PW3 has categorically stated that the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 deceased was an employee in the nursery and he was paying Rs.24,000/- p.m. Thus, learned counsel would support the order passed by the Tribunal and further states that the Tribunal has correctly assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.24,000/- p.m., and prays for not to interfere with the income assessed by the Tribunal. 12. Learned counsel Sri.B.Pradeep appearing for the appellant/insurance company has not canvassed any other ground. 13. On hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the entire material on record including the Trial Court Records, the only point which falls for our consideration is as to, Whether the Tribunal is justified in assessing the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.24,000/- p.m., placing reliance on Ex.P24? - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 14. The accident that occurred on 14.08.2021 involving motorbike bearing registration No.KA-15/X-0069 and bus bearing registration No.KA-51/AC-7922 and the accidental death of Bharath, son of the claimants is not in dispute in this appeal. 15. The appellant/insurer is before this Court aggrieved by the assessment of income of the deceased at Rs.24,000/- p.m., placing reliance on Ex.P24. The claimants claimed that the deceased was working as coolie in ‘Sri.Harichand Nursery’ and was receiving a sum of Rs.24,000/- p.m., and in support of their contention, they placed on record Ex.P24. One Sri.Vasudev.K.J., is examined to prove Ex.P24. Ex.P24 is a certificate issued by ‘Sri.Harichand Nursery’ signed by Vasudeva.K.J., which indicates that the said owner of the Nursery was paying a sum of Rs.24,000/- p.m., to the deceased. Except the said certificate in a letterhead, no other corroborative document is placed on record to establish the income of the deceased. PW3 is not placed on record any documents - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 to establish that he was running a Nursery i.e., either license or permission from the competent authority. The claimants have also not placed on record any statement or bank account to show that the credit of the said amount from the appellant No.3 to the account of the deceased. Moreover, a careful perusal of Ex.P24, it is seen that on a blank letterhead, signed by PW3, subsequently, matter is typed, since there is huge gap between the typed matter and the signature of the PW3. Moreover, there is no date to Ex.P24. In that view of the matter, no credence could be given to Ex.P24. The Tribunal in the above circumstances erred in placing reliance on Ex.P24 to assess the monthly income of the deceased. 16. As the claimants have not placed on record any cogent material to establish the income of the deceased, the Tribunal ought to have assessed the notional income of the deceased, taking note of the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority which indicates the income of Rs.15,000/- for the year 2021. Accordingly, - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 we assess the notional monthly income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/-. 17. The Tribunal is right in deducting 50% of the assessed income towards personal expenses of the deceased since he was a bachelor and further it is justified in adding 40% of the assessed income towards future prospects. However, the Tribunal ought to have awarded consortium of Rs.44,000/- to both the claimants. The compensation granted on the head of loss of estate and loss of funeral expenses is in terms of the Hon'ble Apex Court in NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. PRANAY SETHI & OTHERS1. In view of the above, claimants would be entitled for the following modified compensation on the head of loss of dependency as under: Rs.(15000+6000-50%)X12X18= Rs.22,68,000/-. 18. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for the following modified compensation: 1 AIR 2017 SC 5157 - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 Sl.No. PARTICULARS AMOUNT 1. Loss of dependency Rs. 22,68,000/- 2. Loss of consortium (Rs.44,000 each) Rs. 88,000/- 3. Loss of estate Rs. 16,500/- 4. Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/- TOTAL Rs. 23,89,000/- 19. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.23,89,000/- as against Rs.36,81,860/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization. 20. In the result, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER a) Appeal is allowed in part. b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified holding that the claimants would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.23,89,000/- as against Rs.36,81,860/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The entire compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4222-DB MFA No. 279 of 2024 d) The respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the entire compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. e) Apportionment, deposit & disbursement shall be made as per the award of the Tribunal. f) The amount in deposit, if any, be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith along with Trial Court Records. g) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 2 Sl No.: 19