- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND M.F.A. NO.6239/2025 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. ANJALI (WIFE OF DECEASED) AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, W/O. LATE KARTHIK, 2. DIYA A., (MINOR DAUGHTER OF DECEASED) AGED ABOUT 3 YEAR, REP. BY MOTHER AND N ATURAL GUARDIAN ANJALL, W/O. LATE KARTHIK, 3. DURGI. (MOTHER OF DECEASED) AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS W/O RAVI 4. RAVI (FATHER OF DECEASED) AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O. RAMA SWAMI, 5. NITHIN (BROTHER OF DECEASED) AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS S/O. RAVI, 6. DARSHAN (BROTHER OF DECEASED) AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS, S/O. RAVI, Digitally signed by NANJUNDACHARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 ALL ARE R/AT H.NO.4-142, NELLIGUDDE, JARKALA, VTC, YERLAPADY, PO: YERLAPADY, KARKALA TQ. UDUPI DIST-574 102. …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. SHWETHA NAYAK N., ADV. FOR SRI DHANANJAY KUMAR, ADV.) AND: 1. MR. GANANATH HEGDE AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS S/O.K.JAYACHANDRA HEGDE, R/AT H.NO.12-2-75, PREETHAM, S.P. OFFICE ROAD, BRAHMAGIRI, UDUPI-576 101. 2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., REP. BY ITS DIV. MANAGER, 2ND FLOOR, SRI RAM ARCADE, OPP: HEAD POST OFFICE, UDUPI-576101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. GEETHA RAJ, ADV. FOR R2 V/O/D 27.10.2025 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.06.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.1063/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ACJM, KARKALA, UDUPI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. 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:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT) The appellants/claimants are before this Court under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, ‘1988 Act’) not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded under the judgment and award dated 28.06.2024 in MVC.No.1063/2023 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and AMACT at Karkala, Udupi (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) and pray for enhancement of compensation. 2. The claimants filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the 1988 Act claiming compensation for the accidental death of Sri.Karthik, husband of first claimant in a road traffic accident that took place on 08.06.2023 involving a bus bearing registration No.KA-20-AB-7505, while the deceased was riding his scooter bearing registration No.KA-20-EZ-5394 from Bailoor towards Karkala side. It is stated that the deceased was working as artisan and was earning Rs.45,000/- p.m. It is stated that - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 the deceased was aged 23 years. The claimants stated that they were totally dependent on the income of the deceased. 3. On issuance of notice, respondent No.1 remained absent and was placed exparte. Respondent No.2-Insurance company appeared before the Tribunal. The second respondent-Insurance company filed its objections denying the claim petition averments. Further, it is stated that the driver of the offending bus was not holding valid and effective driving license as on the date of accident. However, it admitted the policy in respect of the offending bus. 4. The claimant Nos.1 and 3 examined themselves as PW1 and PW2, apart from marking Ex.P1 to Ex.P21. No evidence was led and Ex.R1 – Insurance policy was marked with the consent. 5. The Tribunal on scrutiny of the material on record, awarded total compensation of Rs.34,55,300/- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 with interest at the rate of 7% p.a., on the following heads: Sl.No. Heads Amount 1. Loss of dependency Rs. 33,45,300/- 2. Parental consortium Rs. 60,000/- 3. Loss of consortium Rs. 20,000/- 4. Conveyance expenses Rs. 10,000/- 5. Funeral expenses Rs. 20,000/- TOTAL Rs. 34,55,300/- 6. While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.14,750/- p.m., deducted ¼ towards personal expenses of the deceased, added 40% towards future prospects and further awarded a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards loss of parental consortium, Rs.20,000/- towards loss of consortium and Rs.10,000/- towards conveyance expenses and Rs.20,000/- towards funeral expenses. The claimants, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation, are in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 7. Heard learned counsel Smt.Shwetha Nayak.N., for Sri.Dhananjay Kumar, learned counsel for appellants/claimants and learned counsel Smt.Geetha Raj - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 for respondent-insurance company. Perused the entire material on record. 8. Learned counsel Smt.Shwetha Nayak.N., for the claimants would contend that the Tribunal failed to assess the notional income of the deceased properly and she submits that in terms of the income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the Tribunal ought to have assessed the notional income of the deceased at Rs.16,000/- p.m., as against Rs.14,750/- p.m., assessed by the Tribunal. Further, learned counsel would submit that the Tribunal erred in not adding any future income while awarding the above compensation. It is also the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants/claimants that the Tribunal also failed to award any compensation to the children and parents of the deceased who are also entitled for consortium at Rs.40,000/- each with 10% enhancement. Thus, he would pray for enhancement of the compensation by modifying the award under challenge. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 9. Learned counsel Smt.Geetha Raj for respondent-insurance company would submit that the Tribunal has awarded just compensation which requires no interference. Learned counsel would further submit that no material is placed on record to establish the income. As such, the Tribunal is justified in assessing the notional income of the deceased at Rs.14,750/- p.m., and prays for dismissal of the appeal. 10. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the entire material on record, the only point which falls for our consideration is as to, Whether the appellants/claimants would be entitled for enhancement of compensation? 11. Answer to the above point would be in the affirmative for the following reasons: The accident that took place on 08.06.2023 involving scooter bearing registration No.KA-20-EZ-5394 and a bus bearing registration No.KA-20-AB-7505 and the death of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 Sri.Karthik, husband of first claimant is not in dispute in this appeal. The respondent-insurance company has not filed any appeal. The claimants are before this Court claiming enhancement of compensation. 12. The Tribunal erred in assessing the notional income of the deceased at Rs.14,750/- p.m. The accident has taken place in the year 2023. For the year 2023, the notional income fixed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is Rs.16,000/-p.m. As such, income of the deceased is re-assessed at Rs.16,000/- p.m., in terms of the income chart of the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority as against Rs.14,750/- p.m., assessed by the Tribunal. 13. The deceased was aged about 23 years and the Tribunal has rightly added 40% of the assessed income towards future prospects and deducted 1/4th towards personal expenses of the deceased taking note of six dependents. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 modified compensation on the head of loss of dependency as under: Rs.(16000+16000x40%)X12X18X1/4=Rs.36,28,800/-. 14. The computation awarded on the head of consortium is not in accordance with law. In terms of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS. PRANAY SETHI & OTHERS1, the claimants would be entitled for Rs.40,000/- towards consortium. The Hon'ble Apex Court in AJMER KAUR AND OTHERS VS. MOHINDER SINGH AND OTHERS2, has reiterated that there is no estoppel in law against grant of loss of filial consortium to the brothers also. Accordingly, the claimants would be entitled for consortium at Rs.40,000/- each. In terms of PRANAY SETHI (supra), the claimants would be entitled to Rs.15,000/- each on the head of funeral and transportation expenses. 15. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for the following modified compensation: 1 AIR 2017 SC 5157 2 CIVIL APPEAL No.6861/2025 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 Sl. No PARTICULARS AMOUNT 1. Loss of dependency Rs. 36,28,800/- 2. Loss of consortium (Rs.40,000/- X 6 each) Rs. 2,40,000/- 3. Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/- 4. Funeral expenses and transportation of body Rs. 15,000/- TOTAL Rs.38,98,800/- 16. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.38,98,800/- as against Rs.34,55,300/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization. 17. In the result, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER a) Appeal is allowed in part. b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified holding that the claimants would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.38,98,800/- as against Rs.34,55,300/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The entire compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7583-DB MFA No. 6239 of 2025 d) The respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the entire compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. e) Apportionment, deposit & disbursement shall be made as per the award of the Tribunal. f) The amount in deposit, if any, be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith along with Trial Court Records. g) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE NC CT:bms List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15