HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1084 OF 2020(MV-D) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8116 OF 2018(MV-D) IN MFA NO.1084 OF 2020 BETWEEN: 1. SMT KOUSALYA W/O LATE M.N. NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, 2. KUM. SAVITHRI D/O LATE M.N.NAGRAJU, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, BOTH ARE R/AT SHIVANANDA COLONY, APMC YARD ROAD, 2ND CROSS, ARSIKERE TOWN-573 103. 3. M.N.DIVKAR, S/O LATE M.N.NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT MATHIGATTA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, KADUR TALUK-577 548. 4. M.N.SUKANAYA W/O M.B.ASHOK, AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT SRIKANTESHWARA NAGAR, 2ND MAIN, BANGALORE 96. 5. M.N.MAMATHA W/O H.L.SHIVAKUMAR, HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 2 - AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT APMC YARD ROAD, 2ND CROSS, SHIVAANADA COLONY, ARSIKERE TOWN-573 103. …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. JAGADEESH H.T, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. PRAVEEN KUMAR S/O LATE MANJUNATHA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT TIMLAPURA CAMP, HOLEHONNUR HOBLI, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 201 2. THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NEHARU NAGAR, SHIMOGA-577 201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. H.R. RENUKA, ADVOCATE FOR R2, VIDE ORDER DATED 09.03.2023, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 14.05.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1788/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT, ARSIKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO.8116 OF 2018 BETWEEN: NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD NEHARU NAGAR SHIVAMSOGA 577201 BY ITS MANAGER …APPELLANT (BY SMT. H.R. RENUKA, ADVOCATE) HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 3 - AND: 1. KOUSALYA W/O LATE M.N. NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, 2. SAVITHRI D/O LATE M.N.NAGRAJU, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, 3. M.N.DIVKAR, S/O LATE M.N.NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, 4. M.N.SUKANAYA W/O M.B.ASHOK, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, RESP 1 TO 4 ARE RESIDENT OF APMC YARD ROAD 2ND CROSS, SHIVANANDA COLONY ARSIKERE 573103 5. PRAVEEN KUMAR S/O LATE MANJUNATHA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS R/O THIMLAPURA CAMP HOLEHONNUR HOBLI SHIMOGGA DISTRICT 577301 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JAGADEESH H.T, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.05.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1788/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT, ARSIKERE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.4,65,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 4 - THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The present appeals have been filed seeking to challenge the Judgment and Award dated 14.05.2018 in MVC No.1788/2016 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & AMACT, Arsikere (hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned Award”). By the Impugned Award, the learned Tribunal has awarded compensation in a sum of Rs.4,65,000/- to the claimants along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. The challenge in MFA No.1084/2020 is by the claimants while the challenge in MFA No.8116/2018 is by the Insurance Company. 2. The brief facts are that on 10.03.2016 at around 07.30 p.m. when the deceased Nagaraju was returning back from work as a pillion rider on his motorcycle bearing registration No.KA.18/EA-4754, another motorcycle coming from the opposite direction, bearing temporary HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 5 - registration No.KA.14/TR-38542 and being driven in a rash and negligent manner, collided with the motorcycle of the deceased. As a result of the accident, the deceased sustained fatal injuries and was hospitalised at Shimoga Hospital where he succumbed to his injuries. 2.1. A claim petition was filed by the claimants seeking compensation in a sum of Rs.25,00,000/-. The owner of the offending vehicle did not appear before the Court and was proceeded ex parte. The Insurance Company(second respondent) contested the matter. 3. On the basis of the pleadings, Issues were framed by the learned Tribunal. The petitioner No.5 before the learned Tribunal, who is the daughter of the deceased Nagaraju, was deposed as P.W.1 while an officer of the Insurance Company was deposed as R.W.2 [sic R.W.1]. The learned Tribunal after examining the pleadings between the parties, awarded amounts for loss of dependency as well as consortium, transport & funeral HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 6 - expenses and other non-pecuniary heads in the following manner: Sl.No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) 01 Loss of dependency Rs.3,20,000-00 02 Loss of consortium to petitioner No.1 Rs. 40,000-00 03 Towards Transport and funeral expenses Rs. 30,000-00 04 Towards loss of estate Rs. 15,000-00 05 Towards love and affection to petitioners 2 to 5(15,000x4) Rs. 60,000-00 Total Rs.4,65,000-00 4. The learned Tribunal also found that the respondent/Insurance Company is liable to make payment of the compensation. As stated above, two appeals have been filed challenging the Impugned Award while the claimants have filed MFA No.1084/2020 for enhancement of the compensation awarded and the Insurance company has filed MFA No.8116/2018 seeking reduction of the compensation. 5. The challenge in the appeal filed by the claimants is on two grounds. Firstly, that the loss of consortium has not been awarded adequately and secondly, that the notional HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 7 - income for the year 2016 was not taken while calculating the compensation. 6. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company on the other hand, has fairly conceded that the notional income should have been taken at Rs.9,500/- per month and that loss of consortium should have been awarded. He further submits that additional amounts were awarded for loss of love and affection, transportation and funeral expenses and that the loss of consortium is equated to loss of love and affection and thus in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Pranay Sethi, Rs.40,000/- for each claimant may be awarded towards loss of consortium and Rs.15,000/- each may be awarded for loss of estate and funeral expenses. 6.1. However, learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that contributory negligence should have been awarded by the learned Tribunal since it was a head on collision. At the time of accident the deceased was riding a motor cycle along with two others and since they were three persons, the contributory negligence needs to be imputed on HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 8 - the claimants as well. Learned counsel for the claimants seeks to rely upon the provisions of Section 128 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in support of his contentions. 7. The issues that arise in the present appeal is whether: (i) Whether the compensation awarded is in accordance with the settled legal principles? (ii) Whether the deceased was partly liable for the accident? 8. As stated above, the award of compensation so far as concerns loss of dependency, the same is required to be modified in terms of the notional income as applicable in the year 2016. The multiplier of ‘5’ is to be taken since the deceased was 68 years old and 2/3rd deduction is to be done since there were 5 family members. If the loss of consortium and loss of love and affection would be clubbed together at the rate of Rs.40,000/- per person, it would amount to Rs.2,00,000/-. The amount of Rs.15,000/- each would be awarded for loss of estate and loss of funeral expenses. The loss of future prospects was not awarded HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 9 - since the deceased was 68 years as mentioned in the post mortem report (Ex.P14). Thus, the compensation awarded is to be revised in the following manner. Sl.No. Particulars Amount (Rs.) 01 Loss of dependency (Rs.9,500x2/3x12x5) Rs.3,80,000-00 02 Loss of consortium (Rs.40,000x5) Rs.2,00,000-00 03 Towards loss of estate and funeral expenses Rs. 30,000-00 Total Rs.6,10,000-00 9. On the aspect of contributory negligence raised by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, he seeks to rely upon Section 128 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The learned Trial Court however examined this contention and held that the Insurance Company could not prove this contention. No evidence has been shown to this Court to reflect otherwise. The relevant extract of the Impugned Order is set out below: “10. Upon careful perusal of the materials available on record, it is pertinent to note that, this being a case for compensation filed by a victim related to motor vehicle accident and the said legislation itself being benevolent HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 10 - one, and meant for benefits of the victims who suffered in a road accident, court cannot adopt strict liability as contemplated in a criminal case to prove rash and negligence on the part of the driver of offending vehicle. But, there should be prima facie materials regarding rash and negligence to fix the owner and Insurance Company liable for payment of compensation. Therefore, a straightjacket formula cannot be adopted in accepting the rash and negligence on the part of driver of insured vehicle. Further their lordship Hon'ble Apex court in Oriental Insurance company Ltd., Vs. Premalatha shukla reported in 2007 ACJ 1928 clearly mandated that; "Proof of rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle is therefore, since qua non for maintaining an application U/s.166 of the act". Hence, the mandate of the Apex court and the circumstances involved in this case clearly indicates that based on prima facie materials court can safely arrive at a conclusion regarding rash and negligent act on the part of the driver of the vehicle. Further, the respondent Insurance Company did not chooses to place any acceptable material to support their contention regarding no fault on the part of driver of the vehicle to which they covered insurance. Under these circumstances, I am of the opinion that, the petitioners have succeeded in proving that the rider of the offending vehicle was rash and negligent at the time of the accident. Hence, I answer this issue No.1 in the affirmative. XXX XXX XXX 16. Thus, from the above discussion, it is clear that whatever the grounds urged by the 2nd respondent is not been proved by them. When all the documents in respect of the vehicle was valid as on the date of the accident, it is both the 1st and 2nd respondents who are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioners. Accordingly this issue is answered in the negative.” [Emphasis Supplied] HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 11 - 10. In view of the aforegoing discussions, the claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.6,10,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. 11. Accordingly, the Court proceeds to pass the following directions: ORDER (i) M.F.A.No.1084/2020 is partly allowed. (ii) M.F.A.No.8116/2018 is dismissed. (ii) The Impugned Judgment and Award dated 14.05.2018 in MVC No.1788/2016 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & AMACT, Arsikere, is modified to the extent that the claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,45,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, in addition to Rs.6,10,000/- that has been awarded by the Tribunal. HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:8420 MFA No. 1084 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 8116 of 2018 - 12 - (iii) The remaining portion of the Impugned Award of the Tribunal remains undisturbed. (iv) The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation with interest at 6% p.a. within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the judgment. (v) The amount in deposit by the Insurance Company before this Court shall be transmitted to the Tribunal within a week. (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. (TARA VITASTA GANJU) JUDGE YN/PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6 Digitally signed by TARA VITASTA GANJU Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNTAKA