- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12496 M.F.A. No.10191/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.10191/2018 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SRI. NARAYANA K.S. S/O LATE SIDDAPPA AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS. 2. SRI. HARISH K.N. S/O NARAYANA K.S. AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. BOTH ARE R/AT. NO.47 11TH CROSS, KEERTHI LAYOUT CHANDAPURA, ANEKAL ROAD BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT BANGALORE-560099. …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. NITYA V, ADV., FOR SRI. PRAKASH M.H. ADV.,) AND: 1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., POLICY ISSUING OFFICE AT NO.40/3 GEETHA MANSION, K G ROAD BENGALURU-560009 REP. BY ITS MANAGER. 2. SRI. GIRIDHAR G.L. S/O LAKSHMIKANTH MAJOR, R/A NO.13 CHANDRASHEKAR AZAD ROAD Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12496 M.F.A. No.10191/2018 GAVIPURAM BENGALURU-560019. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. AKSHAY, ADV., FOR SRI. A. RAVISHANKAR, ADV.,) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE FILE OF THE BEFORE THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU AND TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD IN MVC NO.6238/2016 DATED 14.06.2018 BY ENHANCING IT SUITABLY BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimants seeking for higher compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 14.06.2018 passed in MVC.No.6238/2016 by the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru. 2. Though this appeal is listed for orders, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12496 M.F.A. No.10191/2018 3. Smt.Nitya V., learned counsel for Sri.Prakash M.H., learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the Tribunal has committed grave error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.7,500/- per month as the deceased was a home maker and also used to do tailoring work, hence, she used to earn more than Rs.10,000/- per month. It is submitted that the Tribunal has committed further error in deducting 50% towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased, whereas the appropriate deduction ought to have been one third. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has not awarded the compensation under the head of loss of consortium to claimant No.2 on the ground that he is a major. Hence, she seeks to allow the appeal by reassessing the compensation. 4. Per contra, Sri.Akshay, learned counsel for Sri.A Ravishankar, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondent/insurance company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12496 M.F.A. No.10191/2018 claimants have failed to substantiate the income of the deceased. The deceased was aged about 56 years at the time of accident. Considering the same, the Tribunal has notionally assessed her income as Rs.7,500/- which does not call for any interference. It is submitted that award of compensation by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for any enhancement. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned counsel for the respondent and meticulously perused the material available on record. I have given my anxious consideration to submissions advanced on both sides. 6. The point that arises for consideration in this appeal is "Whether the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal calls for any interference?" 7. It is not in dispute that the wife of claimant No.1 and the mother of claimant No.2 died in a road - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12496 M.F.A. No.10191/2018 accident dated 07.09.2016. It is also not in dispute that the vehicle involved in the accident was insured with respondent No.1 and the liability is also not disputed. It is to be noticed that at the time of accident the deceased was aged about 56 years and was working as a tailor. Considering the same, the Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.7,500/- per month. Though it is claimed that the deceased was doing tailoring work, there is no material placed before the Tribunal to substantiate the said claim. In the absence of acceptable evidence, this Court places reliance on the Notional Income Chart prepared by the KSLSA and re-assesses the income of the deceased at Rs.9,500/- for the purpose of determination of compensation. The Tribunal has deducted 50% of the assessed income towards the personal and living expenses of the deceased. The said deduction runs contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12496 M.F.A. No.10191/2018 and Others1. Hence, the appropriate deduction should be one third as the claimants are husband and son of the deceased. In my considered view, the Tribunal has also committed an error in not awarding any compensation under the head of loss of consortium to claimant No.2. Claimant No.2, who is the son of the deceased is entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium. Hence, the compensation towards loss of dependency is reassessed as under: Rs.9,500 + 10% x 12 x 9 - 1/3rd = 7,52,400/- 8. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards loss of estate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses which does not call for interference. The claimant No.2 is also entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of consortium. 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12496 M.F.A. No.10191/2018 9. Thus, in all, the appellants shall be entitled to modified compensation under the following heads: Thus, the claimants shall be entitled to total compensation of Rs.8,62,400/- as against Rs.5,15,800/- awarded by the Tribunal. 10. 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.8,62,400/- as HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Loss of dependency 7,52,400/- Loss of consortium (Rs.40,000 X 2) 80,000/- Transportation of dead body & funeral expenses 15,000/- Loss of estate 15,000/- Total 8,62,400/- - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12496 M.F.A. No.10191/2018 against Rs.5,15,800/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from 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) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE ABK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18