- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3144/2020 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. DIVYA .R W/O LATE J. MADHESWARAN D/O RAVICHANDRAN AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS. 2. DHAKSHINYA .M D/O LATE J. MADHESWARAN AGED ABOUT 1 YEAR. 3. MANIMEGALAL JAWAHAR W/O LATE JAWAHAR AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS. 4. SRI. SRITHAR JAWAHAR @ SRIDHAR J S/O LATE JAWAHAR AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS (DEAF AND DUMB). ALL ARE PRESENTLY R/AT. #901/3, 2ND FLOOR NEAR GANAPATHI TEMPLE KAGGALIPURA, BANGALORE-571120. ALL ARE PERMANENT R/AT NO.27/75-2 RAMU PILLAI STREET ANNATHANAPATII SALEM, SHEVAPET-636002 TAMILNADU. SINCE APPELLANT NO.2 IS MINOR AND HENCE REP. BY HER MOTHER AND Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 APPELLANT NO.4 IS DEAF AND DUMB AND HENCE REP. BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN APPELLANT NO.3. &APPELLANTS (BY MS. NITYA, ADV., FOR MR. PRAKASH M.H. ADV.,) AND: 1. UNITED INDIA INS. CO. LTD OFFICE AT NO.31, 1ST FLOOR OPPOSITE TO KSIT RAGHUVANAHALLI KANAKAPURA ROAD BENGALURU-560062 REP BY ITS MANAGER. 2. SRI. DARSHAN K.R. S/O RANGASWAMY K.S. MAJOR R/AT. KESTURU VILLAGE MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT-562117. &RESPONDENTS (BY MR. NAGARAJAIAH K, ADV., FOR R1 R2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 24.07.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.7447/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXXIV ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU (SCCH-7), 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: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 24.07.2019 passed in MVC No.7447/2018 on the file of the IX Additional Small Causes Judge & XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small Causes, and Member, MACT-7, Bangalore, (for short, 8Tribunal9). 2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Ms.Nitya, learned counsel for Sri.Prakash M.H., learned counsel for the appellants-claimants submits that the Tribunal committed grave error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.46,000/- per month, which is contrary to the salary slips as per Ex.P13, salary revise letter as per Ex.P14, certificates issued by the employer as per Ex.P15. It is submitted that the deceased was a - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 permanent employee at Prestige Group of Companies. However, the Tribunal, contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, added only 40% of the assessed income and awarded loss of future prospects. Hence, she seeks to re-assess the same by allowing the appeal. 4. Per contra, Sri.Nagarajaiah K., learned counsel for respondent No.1-Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the Tribunal taking note of the Ex.P17, true copy of bank statement, which is a public document, assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.46,001/- per month and rightly disbelieved the salary slip as the salary slip contains a component of EL benefit. It is further submitted that the deceased was not a permanent employee, hence the Tribunal has rightly added 40% of the assessed income towards the loss of future prospects. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing on both the sides and meticulously perused the material available on record including the Tribunal records. 6. The appellants as well as the respondent- Insurance Company are not in dispute that in a road accident that occurred on 31.10.2018, one J.Madheswaran, the husband of the appellant No.1, died in the said accident. In order to prove the claim, the appellant No.1 examined herself as PW1, examined an eye-witness as PW2 and got marked the documents as per Exs.P1 to P23. The respondents did not adduce any evidence. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.46,001/- per month by considering the bank statement as per Ex.P17 and by disbelieving the salary slips as per Exs.P13 and other evidence on record. The perusal of the documentary evidence placed by the appellants i.e., the appointment letter issued by the Prestige Group dated 07.03.2016 as per Ex.P12 indicates - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 that the deceased was working in the said organisation from March 2016 till the date of his death. In order to prove the income of the deceased, the claimants produced the salary slips as per Ex.P13 issued by the employer. The perusal of the salary slips, which are 14 in numbers, indicate that the initial basic salary of the deceased was Rs.25,042.50, House Rent Allowance Rs.9,922.50, LTA amount Rs.1,890.00, Transport Allowance Rs.1,600.00, City Compensatory Allowance Rs.7,545.00, Medical Pay Rs.1,250.00 and other earnings Rs.500.00, in total Rs.47,750.00 as per the first salary slip produced in the bunch of the salary slips placed before the Tribunal. The aforesaid components found in the first salary slip can be noticed in the subsequent salary slips as well. 7. The claimants have produced the letter issued by the employer as per Ex.P14, the said letter indicates that the salary of the deceased was revised from Rs.50,255/- per month to Rs.52,276/- with effect from 01.04.2018. Admittedly, the accident is after 01.04.2018. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 The claimants have produced the certificate issued by the employer, which indicate that the deceased was in employment from 07.03.2016 till 31.10.2018 i.e., till he passed away in the road accident. In my considered view, the Tribunal has committed an error in ignoring the salary slips, letter of the employer and the certificate as per Exs.P13 to P15 and placing reliance only on the bank statement. The Tribunal has also not explained or assigned any reasons with regard to the various entries found in the bank statement. The bank statement consists of more than 25 pages containing various entries. Hence, I am of the considered view that the income of the deceased is required to be re-assessed at Rs.52,276/- per month. 8. The evidence of PW1 and Exs.P12 to P15 indicate that the deceased was in employment with the Prestige Group from 07.03.2016 till his death i.e., on 31.10.2018. Hence, the appointment of the deceased cannot be termed as a temporary appointment, hence, the same is required to be considered as a permanent - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 employment for the purpose of determination of compensation under the head of loss of future prospects, thus, 50% is required to be added towards the loss of future prospects. 9. The learned counsel for the respondent- Insurance Company has placed reliance on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Royal Sundaram General Insurance Co., Ltd., vs. Sri.Jayanta Saha and others1 and contend that in the said case the deceased was working in WIPRO and the Division Bench of this Court considered addition of 40% towards future prospects. In my considered view the said judgment cannot be applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case as the case is required to be considered based on the evidence before it. In the case on hand, the claimants have produced sufficient material to show that the deceased was in employment with the Prestige Group and his employment was permanent. Hence, the addition 1 MFA No.5145/2023 c/w MFA No.7123/2023 DD.15.10.2024 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 towards future prospects would be 50% as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others2. Having re-assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.52,276/- per month, a sum of Rs.200/- per month is required to be deducted towards Professional Tax, thus, monthly income comes to Rs.52,076/- and annually it comes to Rs.6,24,912/- (Rs.52,076 x 12). Out of the said amount, Income Tax as per the slab for the financial year 2018-19 is required to be deducted, hence, the same is calculated as under: i. Annual income Rs.6,24,912.00 ii. Income Tax a)Upto Rs.2,50,000/- Nil b)Rs.2,50,001 to Rs.5,00,000 (5%) Rs.12,500 c)Rs.5,00,001 to Rs.10,00,000 (20%) For Rs.1,24,911 Rs.24,982.20 Rs.37,482.20 Rs.37,482.20 iii. Total (i - ii) Rs.5,87,429.80 2 (2017) 16 SCC 680 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 10. Thus, the annual income of the deceased after deducting the income tax would be Rs.5,87,429.80 rounded off to Rs.5,87,430/-. Insofar as deduction towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased and the applying of appropriate multiplier is concerned, the same remains unaltered. Hence, the compensation under the head of loss of dependency would be is re- assessed as under: Rs.5,87,430 + 50% x 16 x 2/3 = Rs.93,98,880/- 11. The appellants-claimants would be entitled to a sum of Rs.16,500/- under the head of 8loss of estate9 and Rs.16,500/- under the head of 8funeral expenses & transportation of dead body9 including 10% escalation. The appellants-claimants are also entitled to a sum of Rs.44,000/- each towards loss of consortium including 10% escalation. Thus, in all, the appellants-claimants shall be entitled to modified compensation under the following heads: - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 Thus, the claimants shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.96,07,880/- as against Rs.84,13,380/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER a) Appeal is allowed in part. b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the claimants would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.96,07,880/- as against Rs.84,13,380/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Loss of estate 16,500 Funeral expenses and transportation of dead body 16,500 Loss of consortium (Rs.44,000 x 4) 1,76,000 For loss of dependency 93,98,880 Total 96,07,880 - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15803 M.F.A. No.3144/2020 the date of petition till the date of payment. d) The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. e) The apportionment, deposit and disbursement shall be made as per award of the Tribunal. f) Registry is directed to transmit the records to the Tribunal forthwith. g) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11