- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH 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. 6811 OF 2023 (MV-D) C/W M.F.A. NO. 5447 OF 2023 (MV-D) IN MFA NO. 6811/2023 BETWEEN: 1. SHAMBHAVI S M W/O LATE B G PREETHAM, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O C/O MANJUNATHA GOWDA, SARAHALLI VILLAGE, ALDUR POST, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT 577101. 2. KUM. SANKALAP B P D/O LATE B G PREETHAM, AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS, MINOR REP. BY NATURAL GUARDIAN APPELLANT NO.1 R/O C/O MANJUNATHA GOWDA, SARAHALLI VILLAGE, ALDUR POST, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT 577101. 3. VASANTHA W/O GOPALA B AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O BETTADAKESHAVI, NAGENAHALLI POST, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT -573201. Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 4. GOPALA B S/O LATE BHANDRE GOWDA B P AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O BETTADAKESHAVI, NAGENAHALLI POST, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT- 573201. 5. PAVANA B G W/O VARUNKUMAR M R D/O GOPALA B AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O KALLEDAVARAPURA VILLAGE, KAIMARA POST, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT- 577101. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE, ADV.) AND: 1. THE MANAGER M/S. UNITED INDIA INS CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, CRESCENT COURT, K M ROAD, CHIKKAMAGALURU CITY. 2. THE MANAGER M/S. UNITED INDIA INS CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, PANDURANGA COMPLEX, K T STREET, CHIKKAMAGALURU CITY 3. ASLAM S/O ABDULLA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O KITTALAGANDI VILLAGE, DARADAHALLI POST, MUDIGERE TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT -577101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI, ADV. FOR R1 SRI S.V. HEDGE MULKHAND, ADV. FOR R2 SRI N.R. RAVIKUMAR, ADV. FOR R3) THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.06.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO. 345/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 MACT, CHIKKAMAGALURU, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 5447/2023 BETWEEN: THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, P B NO. 114, REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, CRESENT COURT, K.M. ROAD CHIKKAMAGALUR, PIN CODE-577101. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. BENNI RAVISH CHANDRASHEKAR, ADV.) AND: 1. SMT. SHAMBHAVI S M W/O LATE B.G. PREETHAM, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O C/O MANJUNATHA GOWDA, SARAHALLI VILLAGE ALDUR POST, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN CODE.577111. 2. KUM. SANKALPA B.P D/O LATE B.G. PREETHAM, AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS, MINOR, REPT. BY HER NGM R/O C/O MANJUNATHA GOWDA, SARAHALLI VILLAGE, ALDUR POST, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN CODE-577111. 3. SMT. VASANTHA W/O GOPALA.B AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/AT BETTADAKESHAVI, NAGENAHALLI POST, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT PIN CODE-573115. 4. SRI. GOPALA B S/O LATE BHADRE GOWDA B.P. AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT BETTADAKESHAVI, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 NAGENAHALLI POST, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT PIN CODE-573115. 5. SMT. PAVANA B.G W/O VARUNKUMAR M.R D/O GOPALA.B AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O KALLEDEVARAPUA VILLAGE, KAIMARA POST, CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT PIN CODE -577131. 6. SRI. ASLAM S/O ABDULLA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O KITTALAGANDI VILLAGE, DARADAHALLI POST, MUDIGERE TALUK, PIN CODE -577132. 7. THE MANAGER M/S. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, PANDURANGA COMPLEX, K. T. STREET, CHIKKAMAGALURU CITY, PIN CODE 577101. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE, ADV. FOR R1-R5 R2 IS MINOR- REP. BY R1 SRI S.V. HEGDE MULKAND, ADV. FOR R7 R6 – ASLAM SERVED) THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.06.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.345/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MEMBER, MACT, CHIKKAMAGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.18,91,400/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The claimants as well as insurer are in appeal under Section 176 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘the Act’) against the judgment and award dated 01.06.2023 in MVC.No.345/2021 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge & CJM and MACT, Chikkamagaluru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’). The claimants in MFA.No.No.6811/2023 are before this Court not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation with a prayer to enhancement of compensation, whereas, the insurer is in appeal questioning the saddling of liability and quantum of compensation. 2. Brief facts of the case are, that the claimants, wife and children of deceased one B.G.Preetham filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Act claiming compensation for the accidental death of B.G.Preetham in a road traffic accident that occurred on 07.11.2020 involving Maruti Ertiga car bearing registration No.KA-46- - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 M-3589 and a lorry bearing registration No.KA-53-6647. It is stated that the deceased was earning Rs.50,000/- p.m., and the claimants were totally dependents on the income of the deceased. As on the date of the accident, deceased was aged 31 years. 3. On issuance of notice, respondents appeared before the Tribunal and filed their objections to the claim petition. Respondent No.1 denied the alleged manner of accident and contended that the accident in question took place solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the car and further stated that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the lorry. It was also stated that the insurance policy issued by the second respondent was in force and if any compensation to be paid would be by respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 in its objections denied the entire claim petition averments and contended that there is breach of conditions of policy. It also denied the manner of occurrence of accident and further stated that the accident occurred solely due to the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 rash and negligent driving of the driver of the car. Respondent No.3 contended that the accident occurred solely due to the negligent driving of the driver of the lorry and thus, they prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. 4. The claimants in support of their claim, claimant No.1 examined herself as PW1 and examined one more witness as PW2 apart from marking Ex.P1 to Ex.P11. The respondents examined RW1 and RW2 and marked Ex.R1 to Ex.R7. The Tribunal on appreciation of material on record awarded total compensation of Rs.18,91,400/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., on the following heads: 1 Loss of Dependency Rs. 18,14,400-00 2 Loss of estate Rs. 16,500-00 3 Loss of consortium Rs. 44,000-00 4 Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500-00 TOTAL Rs.18,91,400-00 5. While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- p.m., added 40% of the assessed income towards future prospects, adopted multiplier of 16 and - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 deducted ¼ towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. 6. The claimants are before this Court claiming enhancement of compensation and the insurer is before this Court questioning the liability as well as quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 7. Learned counsel for the insurer/respondent No.2 before the Tribunal contended that the accident occurred solely due to the negligent driving of the driver of the car and it is further submitted that the lorry bearing registration No.KA-53-6647 was not at all involved in the said accident. Learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company contended that the insured lorry was proceeding and the car in which the deceased was travelling or driving came from behind and while it was overtaking the lorry noticing that a vehicle from the opposite side was coming, driver of the car took to right side and dashed to a tree. In that process, the insured lorry was not involved in the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 accident and either car or any other vehicle are dashed or touched the lorry. Therefore, it is contended that no liability could be fastened on the second respondent- insurer of the lorry. Learned counsel for the insurer also further submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side and insofar as the quantum of compensation, it needs to be reduced. Thus, it is prayed to allow the appeal. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimants would submit that the Tribunal is justified in fastening the liability on the appellant/insurer of the lorry since the driver of the lorry suddenly turned to its right and to avoid the accident, deceased has turned his car to right side which resulted in dashing against a road side tree. Further, learned counsel for the claimants would submit that the Tribunal committed an error in assessing the notional monthly income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/-. It is submitted that though the claimants had stated that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.50,000/- p.m., no - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 document was placed on record to establish the income and in that circumstances, notional income of the deceased ought to have been assessed taking note of the income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, wherein for the year 2020, notional income of Rs.14,500/- is fixed. Further, learned counsel would submit that the quantum of compensation awarded on the head of loss of consortium is also on the lower side and each of the claimants would be entitled for consortium of Rs.44,000/- each including the enhancement. Thus, he would pray for enhancing the quantum of compensation by allowing the claimants’ appeal. 9. The accident that took place on 07.11.2020 involving Maruti Ertiga car bearing registration No.KA-46- M-3589 and a lorry bearing registration No.KA-53-6647 and the accidental death of one B.G.Preetham, husband of first claimant is not in dispute. However, the appellant/insurer has disputed the manner of accident and - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 contended that the insured lorry is not involved in the accident. 10. On behalf of the claimants, wife of the deceased i.e., claimant No.1 is examined as PW1 and one Nandish – eye witness to the accident is examined as PW2. PW1 has deposed that at the time of accident, deceased B.G.Preetham was driving the car and she has denied the suggestion that one Sharath was driving the car as stated in Ex.P2 complaint. 11. PW2 is an eyewitness. He has specifically deposed that in front of the car, lorry was proceeding while the driver of the car was trying to overtake the lorry, driver of the lorry without any signal took to right side and to avoid the accident, driver of the car took to right side, which resulted in car dashing to a tree. In the cross- examination, he has specifically deposed that deceased B.G.Preetham was driving the car. To a suggestion that in - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 the accident, no part of the lorry touched the car is denied. 12. It is also submitted by the appellant/insurer that car was driven by one Sharath, as noted in the complaint filed by eyewitness one Bhaskar and that Sharath had no driving license. The Tribunal on assessment of the entire material on record and police documents has given a categorical finding that there is no evidence that the accident had occurred due to the fault on the part of the car driver i.e., Sharath. Moreover, whether Sharath had license or not is not proved by the insurer. In the above circumstances, insurer’s appeal stands rejected. 13. The claimants have sought for enhancement of compensation contending that the income of the deceased is not assessed properly and that the Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation on the head of consortium to all the claimants who are wife, children and parents of the - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 deceased. The Tribunal assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- p.m. The claimants stated that the deceased was earning a sum of Rs.50,000/- p.m. However, the claimants have not placed on record any cogent evidence or material to establish the said income. In the absence of material to establish the income, it was for the Tribunal to assess the notional income based on the income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. For the year 2020, notional income fixed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is Rs.14,500/-. Accordingly, notional income of the deceased is assessed at Rs.14,500/- as against Rs.9,000/- assessed by the Tribunal. 14. Claimant No.1 is the wife, claimant No.2 is daughter, claimant Nos.3 and 4 are parents, would be entitled for spousal, parental and filial consortium at the rate of Rs.44,000/- each including the enhancementd income in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 LIMITED VS. NANU RAM & OTHERS1. The Tribunal has rightly added 40% of the assessed income towards future prospects, correctly adopted the multiplier of 16 and deducted ¼ towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased which do not require interference. The Tribunal is also justified in awarding a sum of Rs.16,500/- each on the head of loss of estate and funereal expenses which also do not require interference. 15. On re-assessment of the monthly income of the deceased, claimants would be entitled for modified compensation on the head of loss of dependency as follows: Rs.14500+40%X12X16X3/4 = Rs.29,23,200/-. 16. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for the following modified compensation: Sl.No. PARTICULARS AMOUNT 1. Loss of dependency Rs. 29,23,200/- 2. Loss of consortium (Rs.44,000 each) Rs. 1,76,000/- 3. Loss of estate Rs. 16,500/- 1 2018 ACJ 2782 - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 4. Funeral expenses Rs. 16,500/- TOTAL Rs. 31,32,200/- 17. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.31,32,200/- as against Rs.18,91,400/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization. 18. 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.31,32,200/- as against Rs.18,91,400/- 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. d) The respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the entire compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within four - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5139-DB MFA No. 6811 of 2023 C/W MFA No. 5447 of 2023 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.: 11