- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5762-DB MFA No. 8264 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 8264 OF 2025 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TUMKURU DIVISION & DISTRICT, HAVING ITS HEAD OFFICE AT BANGALORE CENTRAL OFFICE, H.K. ROAD, SHANTINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER, CENTRAL OFFICES, K. H. ROAD, SHANTINAGAR, BANGALORE-560027. …APPELLANT (BY SRI HALEEMA AMEEN, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. MEENAKSHAMMA, W/O LATE BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, 2. MANJULA D/O LATE BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5762-DB MFA No. 8264 of 2025 3. BHAVYA, D/O LATE BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, 4. KUSUMA, D/O LATE BASAVARAJU, AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF DODDENNEGERE VILLAGE, HANDANAKERE HOBLI, CN HALLI TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 214. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI GOPALAKRISHNAMURTHY C., ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.06.2025 PASSED IN MVC No.168/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS. 21,79,900/- WITH INTEREST AT 7 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. 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:5762-DB MFA No. 8264 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The appellant-Corporation is before this Court questioning the judgment and award dated 26.06.2025 in MVC No.168/2024 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC at Chikkanayakanahalli (for short, 'the Tribunal'), questioning the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 2. Heard Smt. Haleema Ameen, learned counsel for the appellant-Corporation, and Sri C. Gopalakrishnamurthy, learned counsel for the respondents-claimants. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the claimants are wife and children of the deceased Basavaraju, filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation for the accidental death of the said Basavaraju, husband of first claimant in a road traffic accident that took place on 26.12.2021 involving KSTRC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-06-F- 1258. It is stated that the deceased was 50 years and was earning a sum of Rs.20,000/- per month by doing agriculture work and vending milk. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5762-DB MFA No. 8264 of 2025 4. On issuance of notice, the respondent-Corporation i.e. appellant herein appeared before the Tribunal and filed objection denying the claim petition averment. Further, it is contented that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the KSRTC bus and it is solely due to the negligence of the deceased, accident occurred. 5. In support of their claim, claimant No.2, the daughter of the deceased examined herself as PW1, and also examined PW2-doctor and marked Exs.P1 to P24. The respondent examined RW1 and marked Ex.R1. 6. The Tribunal on appreciation of the material on record awarded total compensation of Rs.21,79,900/- and while awarding the above compensation, assessed the income of the deceased notionally at Rs.15,000/- per month, applied multiplier of '13', added 25% of the assessed income towards future prospects, deducted 1/3 towards personal and living expenses of the deceased. 7. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation, the appellant-Corporation is before this Court in this appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5762-DB MFA No. 8264 of 2025 8. Smt. Haleema Ameen, learned counsel would submit that the Tribunal committed grave error in adopting '13' multiplier when the deceased was aged 50 years and further it is submitted that the Tribunal also committed a grave error in granting 25% of the assessed income towards future prospects. Since the diseased was aged 50 years, 6 months and 15 days as on the date of his death, the claimants would be entitled to 10% towards future prospects and not 25% as awarded by the Tribunal. 9. Learned counsel would also submit that the interest at the rate of 7% per annum granted by the Tribunal is on the higher side and it is prayed to reduce the same from 7% to 6%. Thus, learned counsel prays for allowing the appeal and to modify the compensation. 10. Sri C. Gopalakrishnamurthy, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-claimants would submit that the deceased was aged 50 years and adopting multiplier of '13' is correct and is in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarala Verma vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & another reported in [(2009) 6 SCC 121]. Further, learned counsel would submit that the Tribunal is also - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5762-DB MFA No. 8264 of 2025 justified in awarding 25% of the assessed income towards future prospects. Learned counsel would further submit that the Tribunal has taken note of the current bank rate of interest and has rightly awarded 7% interest, which needs no interference. Thus, he would pray for dismissal of the appeal. 11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the entire appeal papers, the only point which falls for consideration is that as contented by the learned counsel for the appellant, whether the impugned award needs modification? 12. The answer to the above point would be in the 'affirmative' for the following reasons. 13. The accident that took place on 26.12.2021 involving KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-06-F-1258 and the accidental death of husband of the first claimant, Basavaraju in a road traffic accident is not in dispute in this appeal. The appellant- Corporation is before this Court in this appeal against the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and prays for reduction of the quantum of compensation. 14. It is an admitted fact and the Tribunal based on the material placed before it, has given a finding that the deceased - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5762-DB MFA No. 8264 of 2025 was aged 50 years as on the date of accident. Learned counsel for the appellant pointing to the Ex.P24 submits that deceased date of birth was 09.06.1971 and the deceased was aged 50 years, 6 months and 15 days as on the date of accident. Therefore, she submits that the claimants would not be entitled to add 25% of the assessed income towards future prospects and it is submitted that in terms of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd., vs. Pranay Sethi reported in [(2017) 16 SCC 680, the claimants would be entitled for adding 10% of the assessed income towards future prospects. The said submission needs to be accepted, since the deceased has completed 50 years, the claimants would be entitled to add only 10% of the assessed income towards future prospects in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Pranay Sethi (supra). 15. The Tribunal is justified in adopting multiplier of '13'. The multiplier in terms of Sarala Verma (supra), is to be adopted. Based on the age of the deceased, for the age between 46 to 50 years, multiplier of '13' is to be adopted. For the age 51 to 55, multiplier of '11' is to be adopted. Since the deceased has not completed 51 years and he was yet to complete 51 years, - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5762-DB MFA No. 8264 of 2025 adoption of '13' multiplier is correct. The deduction of 1/3rd towards personal expenses and awarding compensation on funeral expenses and loss of estate is proper and correct. 16. The Tribunal has granted 7% interest on the award amount. Taking note of the present bank rate of interest, we do not find any error or irregularity in awarding 7% interest to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 17. Accordingly, loss of dependency is calculated as under: Rs.15,000/- x 12 = Rs.1,80,000/- Rs.1,80,000/- (+) 10% future prospects = 1,98,000/- Rs.1,98,000/- (-) 1/3% = Rs.1,32,000/- Rs.1,32,000/- X '13' = Rs.17,16,000/-. 18. The claimants would be entitled for the modified compensation as follows: Sl. No. Particulars Compensation awarded by the Tribunal (in Rs.) Modified compensation (in Rs.) 1. Love and affection 1,93,600/- 1,93,600/- 2. Loss of contribution to the family and future prospects 19,50,000 17,16,000/- 3. Funeral, obsequies & transportation expenses 18,150,/- 18,150/- 4. Loss of estate 18,150/- 18,150/- Total 21,79,900/- 19,45,900/- - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:5762-DB MFA No. 8264 of 2025 The claimants would be entitled to reduced compensation of Rs.19,45,900/- as against Rs.21,79,900/- as awarded by the Tribunal. 19. For the reasons recorded above, the following; ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The apportionment would be as directed by the Tribunal. (iii) The amount in deposit be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE DDU/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14