HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20328 MFA No. 2809 of 2017 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU MFA NO.2809 OF 2017 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. KARIYAPPA S/O DURUGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/O HULLKATTE VILLAGE, HOSADURGA TALUK – 577 527, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT. 2. ASHOKA S/O KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O NO.203, BASAPPANAKATTE, BANGALORE – 560 058. 3. SHANKAR S/O KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O NO.E/103, 7TH CROSS ROAD, RAJAGOPALANAGAR, LAGGERE, BANGALORE NORTH, BANGALORE-58. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. SHASHIDHARA.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S HINDUSTAN COCA COLA BEVERAGES, NO.44/1, KODIGEHALLI ROAD, BELLARY ROAD, HEBBAL, BANGALORE - 92. 2. THE LEGAL MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20328 MFA No. 2809 of 2017 2 BANGALORE - 91. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVI.S.SAMPRATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1-DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD:11.04.2018) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.11.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.2613/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XIX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, MACT, BANGALORE, (SCCH-17), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDER THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal seeks to challenge the Judgment and Award dated 29.11.2016 in MVC No.2613/2015 passed by the XIX Additional Small Cause Judge & MACT, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Impugned Award’). By the Impugned Award, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation to the appellants/claimants in a HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20328 MFA No. 2809 of 2017 3 sum of Rs.11,28,000/- along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till its realisation. 2. Notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with by order dated 11.04.2018. The appeal has been contested by the appellants/claimants and learned counsel for the respondent No.2/Insurance Company. 3. Briefly the facts of the case are that on 05.04.2015, when the deceased Nagaraj was riding his motorcycle bearing No.KA-03/ES-2119 on the Mysore-Bangalore road, at that time, a driver of a Lorry bearing registration No.KA-50/3841 came in a high speed with rash and negligent manner and collided against him. On account of the accident, the deceased Nagaraj fell down and died instantaneously on the road itself. A claim petition was filed by the father and brothers of the deceased before the learned Tribunal. It was averred that deceased Nagaraj was working as a Tipper Lorry driver in Bosch Company. The claim petition was contested by the respondent No.2/Insurance Company. None appeared for the owner of HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20328 MFA No. 2809 of 2017 4 the vehicle and he was accordingly proceeded with ex parte before the Tribunal. 3.1. Based on the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed by the learned Tribunal: “1. Whether petitioners prove that on 05.04.15 at about 11.30 p.m. the Deceased was returning home on motorcycle bearing No.KA-03-ES-2119, when he was taking U turn, near Wander La Gate, BM Road, Bidadi Hobli, Bangalore, met with an accident and sustained injuries and succumbed to death on the spot due to actionable negligence on the part of driver of Lorry bearing No.KA-50-3841 as alleged? 2. Whether petitioners prove the age, occupation and income of deceased? 3. Whether R2 proves that there is violation of terms and conditions of the policy? 4. Whether petitioners are entitled for compensation? If so, at what rate and from whom? 5. What order or award?” 3.2 The appellants/claimants examined petitioner No.1 as PW1 and marked the documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P9. The respondents examined two witnesses as RW.1 and RW.2 which included the Superintendent of RTO and marked the documents as Ex.R1 to Ex.R9. The learned Tribunal calculated the income of the deceased at the rate of HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20328 MFA No. 2809 of 2017 5 Rs.7,000/- per month and also gave a finding that there was no positive proof of the amount spent towards funeral expenses. In addition, since the deceased was a bachelor, 50% income has been deducted on account of personal expenses. 3.3. The learned Tribunal after examining the evidence placed before it, has awarded the compensation under the following heads: Sl.No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) 1 Towards loss of dependency 10,08,000-00 2 Towards loss of love and affection 1,00,000-00 3 Towards travelling expenses 20,000-00 TOTAL 11,28,000-00 4. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants submits that the Impugned Award suffers from an infirmity in view of the fact that the award for loss of dependency has been wrongly calculated since it was calculated at a notional income of Rs.7,000/- and did not consider Rs.9,000/- as per the notional income chart of Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. In addition, he contends that no HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20328 MFA No. 2809 of 2017 6 amounts have been awarded for loss of estate, funeral expenses or loss of consortium in terms of the settled law. The learned counsel further submits that loss of future prospects were also not granted by the learned Tribunal. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly submits that the accident took place in the year 2015. Thus, the notional income should have been taken by the learned Tribunal at Rs.9,000/- per month instead of Rs.7,000/- per month. However, in addition, learned counsel further contends that the amounts towards loss of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses ought to have been awarded by the learned Tribunal. 6. The question that arises for consideration before this Court is whether the compensation that has been calculated by the learned Tribunal is in accordance with law? 7. As stated above, the notional income for the year 2015 would be at the rate of Rs.9,000/- per month and HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20328 MFA No. 2809 of 2017 7 since the deceased was 33 years old, amounts for future prospects are also required to be added. 8. In addition, in terms of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt) and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another1, the loss of future income and funeral expenses are required to be awarded. Accordingly, the notional income for the year 2015 is taken at Rs.9,000/- per month and since the deceased was aged 33 years, 40% future prospects are also required to be added. The deceased was a bachelor, thus 50% of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenses. Applying the multiplier ‘16’, the loss of dependency is recomputed as follows: Heads Amounts Loss of dependency Rs.9,000 + 40% = 12,600/- Rs.12,600x12x1/2x16 =12,09,600/- 9. Further, in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121 HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20328 MFA No. 2809 of 2017 8 Sethi2, loss of consortium is payable at Rs.40,000/- to three claimants, amounting to ₹1,20,000/-. The claimants are also entitled to compensation under the conventional heads. Accordingly, loss of estate and funeral expenses are awarded at ₹15,000/- each. To this extent, the award of the Tribunal requires to be recalculated in the following terms. Sl.No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) 01. Loss of Dependency 12,09,600-00 02. Loss of Consortium (Rs.40,000x3) 1,20,000-00 03. Loss of Estate 15,000-00 04. Transportation of dead body, funeral expenses charges and miscellaneous expenses 15,000-00 Total 13,59,600-00 Less: Awarded by the Tribunal 11,28,000-00 Enhanced compensation 2,31,600-00 10. Hence, the appellants/claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.13,59,600/- along with interest as 2 (2017) 16 SCC 680 HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20328 MFA No. 2809 of 2017 9 awarded by the learned Tribunal, from the date of petition till its realization. 11. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part; (ii) The Judgment and Award dated 29.11.2016 in MVC No.2613/2015 passed by the XIX Additional Small Cause Judge & MACT, Bangalore is modified, enhancing the compensation by Rs.2,31,600/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum as awarded by the learned Tribunal from the date of petition till realization. (iii) The remaining portion of the Impugned Award of the Tribunal remains undisturbed. (iv) The respondent No.2/Insurance company is directed to pay the enhanced compensation with interest as awarded by the Tribunal within eight weeks from today. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20328 MFA No. 2809 of 2017 10 (v) On such deposit of compensation, the same shall be released in favour of the appellants/claimants, on filing of an appropriate application for withdrawal of the enhanced amount. (vi) The Registry is directed to draw the modified Award accordingly. (vii) The Registry is directed transmit a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal, along with its records. (viii) No order as to costs. Sd/- (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE YN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2 Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA