- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4473 MFA No. 8556 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8556 OF 2022(MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. KAVYA M. M. W/O. LATE LOKESHA S. C. AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS 2. LIKITH GOWDA S. L. S/O. LATE LOKESHA S. C. AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS 3. ADWIKA S. L. D/O. LATE LOKESHA S. C. AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS APPELLANT NOS.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS, REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN-MOTHER BY NAME KAVYA M. M.-1ST APPELLANT 4. NARASAMMA W/O. CHANNAPPA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS 5. CHANNAPPA S/O. LATE HUCHAMAYIGOWDA AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS APPELLANT NOS.1 TO 5 ARE RESIDING AT B. SHETTAHALLI VILLAGE HONAKERE HOBLI, NAGAMANGALA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT 6. SUJATHA D/O. CHANNAPPA Digitally signed by SOWMYA DODDAMARAIAH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4473 MFA No. 8556 of 2022 W/O. SURESH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS R/O. BYALADAKERE VILLAGE YEDIYURU HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 7. SHOBHA S. C. D/O. CHANNAPPA W/O. SATHISH AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS R/O. SAMKAHALLI VILLAGE HONAKERE HOBLI, NAGAMANGALA TALUK …APPELLANTS (BY SRI MANJUNATHA L. K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SHIVANADA SUTAR @ SHIVANAD SITARAM SUTAR S/O. SITARAM AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS RESIDING AT SUTAR GALLI MANDRUP, SOUTH SOLAPUR SOLAPUR-21, MAHARASHTRA STATE (OWNER OF THE VEHICLE JEEP BEARING ITS REG NO.MH-13-AZ-9846) 2. THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. 1119/B KAMBLI BUILDING M. C. ROAD, ASHOK NAGAR, MANDYA-01 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI VRUSHABHENDRAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; R-1 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.08.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.1733/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, NAGAMANGALA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4473 MFA No. 8556 of 2022 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Manjunatha.L.K learned counsel for the appellants as well as Sri.H.C.Vrushabhendraiah learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. Being aggrieved by the sum that is awarded as compensation by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagamangala, through orders in MVC No.1733/2019 dated 03.08.2021, the claimants therein filed the present appeal. 3. Appellant No.1 being the wife, appellant No.2 being the minor son, appellant No.3 being the minor daughter, appellant No.4 being the mother, appellant No.5 being the father, appellant Nos.6 and 7 being the sisters of the deceased Lokesh (hereinafter be referred to as the 'deceased' for brevity) who died in a road traffic accident that occurred in the year 2019 filed a petition claiming - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4473 MFA No. 8556 of 2022 compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- in total. The Tribunal through the impugned order held that the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.17,40,000/- as compensation. Projecting that they are entitled to a higher sum, they are before this Court. 4. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the deceased as an agriculturist and by doing milk vending business was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal took the notional income of the deceased as Rs.7,500/- per month. Learned counsel states that the accident occurred in the year 2019 and for the relevant period Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as Rs.14,000/- per month and at least said figure should have been considered by the Tribunal. Learned counsel further submits that compensation granted by the Tribunal under all heads is on lower side. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4473 MFA No. 8556 of 2022 5. Learned counsel who represents respondent No.2 though stated that compensation granted in toto is justifiable, yet did not raise any objection for taking the notional income as Rs.14,000/- per month. 6. Having considered the submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellants, the notional income of the deceased is taken as Rs.14,000/- per month. It is not in dispute that the age of the deceased was 35 years as on the date of accident. Therefore, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 40% of the earnings are required to be added towards future prospects. Appellant Nos.1 to 5 can only be considered to be dependants of the deceased as rightly observed by the Tribunal. Therefore, 1/4th of the earnings of the deceased are required to be deducted towards personal and living expenses, which the deceased would have incurred for himself had he been alive. As also the appropriate multiplier to be applied as - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4473 MFA No. 8556 of 2022 per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 is '16'. Thus, compensation which appellant Nos.1 to 5 are entitled to receive under the head loss of dependency is as under: Description Amount In Rs. Notional monthly income 14,000-00 Annual Income (14,000X12) 1,68,000-00 On adding 40% towards future prospects 2,35,200-00 On deducting 1/4th towards personal and living expenses 1,76,400-00 Loss of dependency, on applying appropriate multiplier '16' 28,22,400-00 Thus, it is clear that the appellants are entitled to a sum of Rs.28,22,400/- towards 'loss of dependency'. 7. Further, appellant No.1 being the wife is entitled to Rs.40,000/- towards loss of spousal consortium, appellant Nos.2 and 3 being the children of the deceased are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each towards loss - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4473 MFA No. 8556 of 2022 of parental consortium and appellant Nos.4 and 5 being the parents of the deceased are entitled to Rs.40,000/- each under the head loss of filial consortium. Also the appellants are entitled to Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses, Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.40,000/- towards medical expenses. Thus, the total compensation which the appellants are entitled to receive under each head is as under: Sl No. Compensation Amount in Rs. 1 Loss of dependency 28,22,400-00 2 Loss of spousal consortium 40,000-00 3 Loss of parental consortium 80,000-00 4 Loss of filial consortium 80,000-00 5 Funeral expenses 15,000-00 6 Loss of estate 15,000-00 7 Medical expenses 40,000-00 Total 30,92,400-00 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4473 MFA No. 8556 of 2022 8. The appellants claimed compensation of Rs.30,00,000/- only. However, the aforementioned discussion makes it clear that they are entitled to a sum of Rs.30,92,400/- as compensation. In number of decisions the Hon'ble Apex Court held that the claimants are entitled to a sum more than that is claimed, in case the said amount is found justifiable. Therefore, this Court considers desirable to award a sum of Rs.30,92,400/- as compensation to the appellants herein. Thus, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagamangala through Orders in MVC No.1733/2019 dated 03.08.2021 is enhanced from Rs.17,40,000/- to Rs.30,92,400/-. (iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4473 MFA No. 8556 of 2022 till the date of deposit except for the period of delay of 198 days as per orders on IA No.1/2022. (iv) Out of the compensation granted, appellant No.1 is entitled to a sum of Rs.13,92,400/-, appellant Nos.2 and 3 are entitled to a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- each, appellant No.4 is entitled to a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-, appellant No.5 is entitled to a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and appellant Nos.6 and 7 are entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- each. (v) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment. (vi) On such deposit, appellant Nos.1, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are permitted to withdraw their respective shares along with their share of interest. (vii) The amount that falls to the share of appellant Nos.2 and 3 shall be kept in any interest yielding fixed deposit scheme of any Nationalised Bank till they attain the age of majority. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:4473 MFA No. 8556 of 2022 (viii) On they attaining the age of majority, appellant Nos.2 and 3 are permitted to withdraw their respective shares along with the accrued interest. (ix) Appellants are permitted to withdraw the enhanced amount only on making good the deficit court fee. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE DS CT:VC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11