Karnataka High Court
Chandrawwa And Ors vs M/S Sadbhava Engineering Limited And ... on 26 November, 2025
Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB
MFA No. 202698 of 2022
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202698 OF 2022 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. CHANDRAWWA
W/O SIDRAMAPPA BAJANTRI,
AGE: 25 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
2. BASAPPA
S/O YAMANAPPA BAJANTRI,
AGE: 60 YEARS,
OCC. AGRICULTURE AND COOLIE,
Digitally signed by 3. SMT. LAXMIBAI
BASALINGAPPA
SHIVARAJ W/O BASAPPA BAJANTRI,
DHUTTARGAON
Location: HIGH AGE: 57 YEARS,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA OCC: HOUSE WORK,
4. KUMARI KHUSHI
D/O SIDRAM @ SIDRAMAPPA BAJANTRI,
AGE: 9 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY HER
M/G MOTHER PETITIONER NO.1.
ALL ARE R/O: YARANAL, TQ: B.BAGEWADI,
NOW RESIDING AT RAM NAGAR,
BYEPASS ROAD, VIJAYAPURA - 585 403.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI BABU H.METAGUDDA, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB
MFA No. 202698 of 2022
HC-KAR
AND:
1. M/S SADBHAVA ENGINEERING LIMITED,
BY ITS PROPRIETOR "SADBHAV HOUSE",
OPP: LAW GARDEN, POLICE CHOWKI,
UDAYAN MARK, ELLIS BRIDGE
AHAMEDABAD - 380 006,
GUJARAT.
AND ALSO SADBHAV ENGINEERING LIMITED,
MANAGULI DEVAPUR ROAD,
PROJECT CHKM49,
MANAGULI TALIKOTI ROAD,
SH61, BALAGANUR, TQ: MUDDEBIHAL,
DIST: VIJAYAPURA - 585 403.
2. THE HEAD CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTER,
IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
3RD FLOOR, ITI BLOCK,
KSCMI BUILDING NO.8,
CUNNINGHAM ROAD, BENGALURU - 58.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
V/O DATED 29.02.2024, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS
APPEAL AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
12.11.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.368/2017 BY THE MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.XV AT VIJAYAPUR, AND
ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION FROM RS.16,76,000/- WITH
6% INTEREST TO RS.47,66,000/- WITH 12% INTEREST AND
ETC.
THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB
MFA No. 202698 of 2022
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD) This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for short) has been filed by the claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 12.11.2021 passed by the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge and Member, MACT-XV, Vijayapura, in MVC No.368/2017.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 08.03.2017 at about 10:30 PM on Managuli-Basavana Bagewadi road near Jerakena Halla near Yaranal village, when the deceased Sidramappa was proceeding on motorcycle bearing registration No.KA- 03/HN-8067 along with his friend as pillion rider, from Managuli to Yaranal village, at that time, a tar road making vehicle bearing No.P53208 ABG was parked negligently in the middle of the road by its driver without any signal lights or indicators, as a result, the motorcycle dashed to the said vehicle and caused the accident. As a -4- NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB MFA No. 202698 of 2022 HC-KAR result of the aforesaid accident, Sidramappa sustained grievous injuries and was shifted to Sanjeevani Hospital Vijayapura, where he succumbed to the injuries on 19.03.2017.
3. The claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation for the death of the deceased along with interest.
4. Upon service of notice, respondent No.2 Insurance Company appeared through counsel and filed written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. Respondent No.1, despite service of notice, did not appear before the Tribunal and was placed ex- parte.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter, recorded the evidence. The Tribunal, by impugned judgment and award has partly allowed the claim petition and held that the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.16,76,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. -5- NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB MFA No. 202698 of 2022 HC-KAR Since the claimants and respondent No.2 have filed joint memo whereby claimants have agreed to receive and respondent No.2 agreed to pay a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- as per the third party liability covered under the policy and respondent No.1 was directed to pay the remaining amount of Rs.10,26,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimants has raised the following contentions:
a) Firstly, since there are four claimants, the Tribunal instead of deducting 1/4th of the income of the deceased for personal expenditure, deducted 1/3rd. The same is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, [(2009) 6 SCC 121].
b) Secondly, claimants assert that the deceased was aged about 22 years at the time of the accident and had a monthly income of Rs.20,000/- He was self employed. -6-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB MFA No. 202698 of 2022 HC-KAR However, the assessment of monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,250/- by the Tribunal is unjustified and erroneous.
c) Thirdly, as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance co. Ltd. -v- Pranay Sethi and Others [AIR 2017 SC 5157], in cases, where the deceased was self-employed or received a fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established income towards 'future prospects' is warranted when the deceased was below the age of 40 years. The said principle shall be applied to the present case.
d) Fourthly, as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (supra), the claimants are entitled for Rs.15,000/- towards 'loss of estate' and Rs.15,000/- towards 'funeral expenses'.
e) Fifthly, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Magma General Insurance Company Limited vs. Nanu Ram and others, 2018 ACJ 2782 each of the claimants is entitled to -7- NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB MFA No. 202698 of 2022 HC-KAR compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head of 'loss of love and affection and consortium'.
f) Lastly, considering the age and avocation of the deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and on the lower side. With the above contentions, the learned counsel sought to allow the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has raised the following counter- contentions:
a) Firstly, the liability of the Insurance Company as per the policy is only to an extent of Rs.9,00,000/- to that extent, the Insurance Company has already satisfied the liability.
b) Secondly, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence and considering the age and avocation of the deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. With the above -8- NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB MFA No. 202698 of 2022 HC-KAR contentions, the learned counsel sought to dismiss the appeal.
8. Respondent No.1 owner was served but unrepresented.
9. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.
10. It is not in dispute that Sidramappa died in the road traffic accident occurred on 08.03.2017 whereby he was proceeding on a motorcycle and dashed to the tar road making machine bearing No.P53208 ABG which was parked in the middle of the road negligently.
11. The Tribunal has rightly assessed the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.10,250/-. To the aforesaid income, 40% has to be added on account of future prospects in view of the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in 'Pranay Sethi' (supra). Thus, the monthly income comes to Rs.14,350/-. Since there are 04 dependents, it is appropriate to deduct 1/4th -9- NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB MFA No. 202698 of 2022 HC-KAR of the income of the deceased towards personal expenses and remaining amount has to be taken as his contribution to the family. The deceased was aged about 22 years at the time of the accident and multiplier applicable to his age group is '18'. Thus, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.23,24,700/- (Rs.14,350*12*18*3/4) on account of 'loss of dependency'.
12. In addition, the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.15,000/- on account of 'loss of estate' and compensation of Rs.15,000/- on account of 'funeral expenses'.
13. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of 'Magma General Insurance Co. Ltd.,' (supra), claimant No.1, wife of the deceased is entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head of 'loss of spousal consortium'. Claimant Nos.2 and 3, parents of the deceased are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- each under the head of 'loss of filial consortium' and claimant No.4, daughter of the deceased
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB MFA No. 202698 of 2022 HC-KAR is entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/- each under the head of 'loss of parental consortium'.
14. The compensation of Rs.1,19,604/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head of 'medical expenses' is based on the medical bills produced by the claimants and is deemed just and reasonable.
15. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following compensation:
Compensation under Amount in
different Heads (Rs.)
Loss of dependency 23,24,700
Medical Bills 1,19,604
Funeral expenses 15,000
Loss of estate 15,000
Loss of spousal consortium 40,000
Loss of Parental consortium 40,000
Loss of Filial consortium 80,000
Total 26,34,304
16. In the result, the following order is passed:
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB MFA No. 202698 of 2022 HC-KAR ORDER
a) The appeal is allowed in part.
b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
c) The claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.26,34,304/- as against Rs.16,75,748/- awarded by the Tribunal.
d) The liability of the Insurance Company is only to an extent of Rs.9,00,000/- and out of which Rs.2,50,000/- has already been paid to the injured claimant and remaining Rs.6,50,000/-
has been paid to the appellants herein.
e) Respondent No.1, owner of the offending vehicle is directed to pay the remaining amount of Rs.19,84,304/- (Rs.26,34,304/- less Rs.6,50,000/-) to the claimants along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:7214-DB MFA No. 202698 of 2022 HC-KAR
f) The apportionment, deposit and release of amount shall be made in accordance with the terms of the award of the Tribunal.
Sd/-
(H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/-
(TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY) JUDGE VNR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22