Karnataka High Court

Sri R K Nagaraju @ Nagaraj vs G Bhadraradhya on 1 August, 2025

                            -1-

                                       MFA No. 8014 of 2018
                                                      C/W
                                       MFA No. 5154 of 2018
                                       MFA No. 5155 of 2018
                                       MFA No. 8017 of 2018


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
        DATED THIS THE 01ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
                         BEFORE
         THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA
     MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8014/2018 (MV)
                           C/W
       MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5154/2018,
      MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5155/2018 &
       MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8017/2018

IN MFA NO.8014/2018:
BETWEEN:
1.     SRI. R.K. NAGARAJU @ NAGARAJ,
       S/O LATE KALLAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

2.     CHETHAN KUMAR R.N,
       S/O R.K. NAGARAJU @ NAGARAJ,
       AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,

3.     DIWAKAR R.K,
       S/O R.K. NAGARAJU @ NAGARAJ,
       AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,

ALL ARE RESIDING AT:
NO:549/B, MADANAYAKANAHALLI,
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK,

PERMANENT RESIDING AT:
RUDRAPURA VILLAGE, TIPTUR TALUK,
TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 101.
                                              ...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE)
                            -2-

                                    MFA No. 8014 of 2018
                                                   C/W
                                    MFA No. 5154 of 2018
                                    MFA No. 5155 of 2018
                                    MFA No. 8017 of 2018


AND:

1.     G. BHADRARADHYA,
       S/O GANGADHARAIAH .B,
       NO.76, NH 4, BOVIPALYA,
       OORUKERE VILLAGE,
       TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 101.

2.     THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
       REGIONAL OFFICE,
       LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX,
       RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS,
       M.G. ROAD,
       BENGALURU-01.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. A.N. KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2,
    V/O DT:01.12.2022, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)

     THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.04.2018, PASSED IN
MVC NO.2567/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL
SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXXIV ACMM., COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

IN MFA NO.5154/2018:
BETWEEN:
THE REGIONAL MANAGER,
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
NO.44/45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX,
OFF. RESIDENCY ROAD, M.G. ROAD,
BENGALURU-560 025.
                                             ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. A.N. KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE)
                            -3-

                                    MFA No. 8014 of 2018
                                                   C/W
                                    MFA No. 5154 of 2018
                                    MFA No. 5155 of 2018
                                    MFA No. 8017 of 2018




AND:

1.     SRI. R.K. NAGARAJU @ NAGARAJ,
       S/O LATE KALLAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
       R/AT NO.549/B,
       MADANAYAKANAHALLI,
       BENGALURU NORTH TALUK,
       PERMANENT R/AT RUDRAPURA VILLAGE,
       TIPTUR TALUK,
       TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 101.

2.     SRI. G. BHADRARADHYA,
       S/O GANGADHARAIAH B,
       NO.76, NH 4, BOVIPALYA,
       OORUKERE VILLAGE,
       TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 101
                                           ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRY, ADVOCATE FOR R1
    (VK NOT FILED), V/O DT:01.12.2022, NOTICE TO R2 D/W)

      THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.04.2018, PASSED IN
MVC NO.2566/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL
SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXXIV ACMM., COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES,    MEMBER,    MACT-7,   BENGALURU,    AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.2,83,810/- WITH INTEREST AT 9%
P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION OF
ENTIRE AMOUNT.

IN MFA NO.5155/2018:
BETWEEN:
THE REGIONAL MANAGER,
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
NO.44/45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX,
OFF. RESIDENCY ROAD, M.G. ROAD,
                             -4-

                                       MFA No. 8014 of 2018
                                                      C/W
                                       MFA No. 5154 of 2018
                                       MFA No. 5155 of 2018
                                       MFA No. 8017 of 2018


BENGALURU-560 025.
                                                ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. A.N. KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     SRI. R.K. NAGARAJU @ NAGARAJ,
       S/O LATE KALLAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

2.     SRI. CHETHAN KUMAR R.N.,
       S/O R.K. NAGARAJU @ NAGARAJ,
       AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,

3.     DIWAKAR R.K.,
       S/O R.K. NAGARAJU @ NAGARAJ,
       AGED ABOUT 24 EYARS,

       ALL RE R/AT NO.549/B,
       MADANAYAKANAHALLI,
       BENGALURU NORTH TALUK,
       PERMANENT R/AT RUDRAPURA VILLAGE,
       TIPTUR TALUK,
       TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 101.

4.     SRI. G. BHADRARADHYA,
       S/O GANGADHARAIAH B,
       NO.76, NH 4, BOVIPALYA,
       OORUKERE VILLAGE,
       TUMKURU DISTRICT-572 101
                                            ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRY, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3,
    R4 SERVED)

     THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.04.2018, PASSED IN
MVC NO.2567/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL
SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXXIV ACMM., COURT OF SMALL
                             -5-

                                    MFA No. 8014 of 2018
                                                   C/W
                                    MFA No. 5154 of 2018
                                    MFA No. 5155 of 2018
                                    MFA No. 8017 of 2018


CAUSES,    MEMBER,   MACT-7,    BENGALURU,     AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.2,83,810/- WITH INTEREST AT 9%
P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.

IN MFA NO.8017/2018:
BETWEEN:
SRI. R.K. NAGARAJU @ NAGARAJ,
S/O LATE KALLAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

RESIDING AT:
NO:549/B, MADANAYAKANAHALLI,
BANGALORE NORTH TALUK,

PERMANENT RESIDING AT:
RUDRAPURA VILLAGE, TIPTUR TALUK,
TUMKURU DISTRICT.
                                             ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     G. BHADRARADHYA,
       S/O GANGADHARAIAH .B,
       NO.76, NH 4, BOVIPALYA,
       OORUKERE VILLAGE,
       TUMKUR DISTRICT.

2.     THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
       REGIONAL OFFICE,
       LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX,
       RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS,
       M.G. ROAD,
       BENGALURU-01.
                                          ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. A.N. KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2,
    V/O DT:08.09.2021, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)
                                  -6-

                                           MFA No. 8014 of 2018
                                                          C/W
                                           MFA No. 5154 of 2018
                                           MFA No. 5155 of 2018
                                           MFA No. 8017 of 2018




     THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.04.2018, PASSED IN
MVC NO.2566/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL
SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXXIV ACMM., COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

     THESE APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
ON 28.07.2025 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
JUDGMENT THIS DAY, P SREE SUDHA J., DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

CORAM:      HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA


                           CAV JUDGMENT

M.F.A. Nos.8014/2018, 8017/2018, 5154/2018 and

5155/2018 are filed against the common award passed by IX

Additional Small Causes and Additional MACT Bangalore, in

MVC No.2566/2016 C/w. 2567/2016 dated 25.04.2018. Both

the claim applications arose out of the same accident dated

16.03.2016. MVC No.2566/2016 is a case of injury and MVC

No.2567/2016 is a case of death.

2. M.F.A. Nos.8014/2018 is filed by the claimants against

the award passed in MVC No.2567/2016, in which it is

contended that the Tribunal granted compensation of

C/W

Rs.8,05,000/- with interest at 9% per annum. Considering the

year of accident and occupation of the deceased, the earnings

of the deceased are to be taken more than Rs.7,000/- per

month. It is further contended that Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd

of income towards personal expenses, instead of 50%. It is

also stated that the Tribunal ought to have granted

compensation under the conventional heads like transportation

and also for filial consortium as per judgment reported in Civil

Appeal No. 9581/2017 dated 18.09.2018.

3. M.F.A. No.5155/2018 is filed by the insurance

company against the award passed in MVC No.2567/2016,

wherein it is contented that respondent No.1-husband of the

deceased is a security guard and not dependent on her income.

Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are major sons and cannot be treated

as dependents. It is also contended that the rate of interest

awarded at 9% per annum is opposed to Section 149(1) of M.V.

Act read with Section 34 of CPC. Therefore, requested this

Court to set aside the judgment of the Tribunal.

4. Heard the arguments of both sides.

C/W

5. P.W.1 in his evidence has stated that his deceased

wife was aged 43 years and she was hale and healthy. She was

working as a tailor in Scotts Garments Ltd., Madavara,

Thumkur Road, getting a salary of Rs.10,000/- per month. He

filed Ex.P.25-employment ID card, Ex.P.26-PAN card and

Ex.P.27-two salary slips. However, P.W.1 has not produced

appointment letter of the deceased to prove her income.

Though he has stated that the amount was credited in her

savings account, bank account number was not produced and

bank passbook was also not filed. As per Exhibit Ex.P.20-

voters identity card, she was aged 43 years as on the date of

death.

6. Regarding the income of the deceased, the Tribunal

has taken her notional income as Rs.7,000/- per month. The

accident was occurred on 16.03.2016. Learned counsel for the

claimants submits that considering the guidelines given to

Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, requested this Court

to consider the notional income at Rs.9,500/- per month as the

C/W

accident was occurred in the year 2016. Though evidence was

let in regarding the income of the deceased, the Tribunal

without considering the same, has taken the notional income at

Rs.7,000/- per month. But the said notional income taken by

the Tribunal was pertaining to the year of the accident 2012

and 2013. Therefore, this Court finds that it is just and

reasonable to take the income of the deceased as Rs.9,500/-

per month. As per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Apex Court in

dictum of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation1, if

the deceased was unmarried, /3 of his income has to be

deducted as there are 2 dependents towards his personal

expenses. Thus, the annual income of the deceased after

deducting personal expenses comes to Rs.6,333/- per month.

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the dictum of National Insurance

Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi2, held that the future

prospects of income of the self-employed deceased shall also

be included in determination of the compensation. Thus,

considering the age of the deceased, 25% of the income has to

(2009) 6 SCC 121

(2017) 16 SCC 680

- 10 -

C/W

be added towards future prospects and thus the amount would

become Rs.7,916/- per month (6333+1583). The multiplier is

to be taken as 14. So, the loss of dependency comes to

Rs.13,29,930/-.

7. The amounts granted under the conventional heads is

just and reasonable, and this Court finds no reason to interfere

with the same.

8. With regard to the interest at 9% per annum granted

on the compensation by the Tribunal, this Court feels to reduce

the same to 6% per annum from the date of petition till the

date of realization.

9. Therefore, The award of compensation granted by the

Tribunal in M.V.C. No.2567/2016 is modified as under:

                  Heads                    Amount in Rs.
 1. Loss of Dependency                          13,29,930/-
 2. Loss of consortium                             40,000/-
 3. Loss of Love and Affection                     15,000/-
 4. Towards Funeral Expenses                       15,000/-
               Total                          13,99,930/-
                                 - 11 -


                                                          C/W

10. In all, the claimants are entitled for the

compensation of Rs.13,99,930/- with interest at 6% p.a. from

the date of petition till realization as against Rs.8,05,000/-

granted by the Tribunal.

11. Though the learned counsel for the insurance

company raised an objection that respondent No.1-husband is

not dependent and respondent Nos.2 and 3-sons are major and

they are not dependent on the income of the deceased, they

lost their wife/mother, when she was aged 43 years. It cannot

be compensated in terms of money. Therefore, the argument of

the learned counsel for the insurance company cannot be

accepted.

12. M.F.A. No.8017/2018 is filed by claimant against the

judgment of the Tribunal passed in M.V.C. No.2566/2016,

seeking enhancement of compensation in which the claimant

has contended that the Tribunal has considered his income as

Rs.8,000/- per month and functional disability was restricted to

12%. In view of the injuries sustained by him, he had more

than 38% of physical disability. It is further contended less

- 12 -

C/W

amounts were granted for medical expenses, conveyance, extra

nourishment, attendant charges, though he was hospitalized for

a longer period and the Tribunal ought to have granted

Rs.30,000/- for removal of implants. Therefore, requested this

Court for enhancement of compensation from Rs.3,01,810/- to

Rs.15,00,000/-.

13. M.F.A. No.5154/2018 is filed by the Insurance

Company against the judgment of the Tribunal in M.V.C.

No.2566/2016 in which the insurance company has contended

that P.W.2 has not treated the first respondent and the

disability assessed by him at the rate of 12% is excessive. It is

also contended that the amount granted under the head pain

and sufferings, mental agony at Rs.70,000/- is excessive and

the interest awarded on the compensation at 9% per annum is

also opposed to Section 149(1) of M.V. Act read with Section

34 of CPC. Therefore, requested this Court to set aside the

judgment of the Tribunal.

14. Heard the arguments of both sides.

- 13 -

C/W

15. The claimant in this case was examined himself as

P.W.1 and also examined the Doctor as P.W.2 and a Medical

Record Technician as P.W.3 and filed Exs.P.1 to P.35 to support

his version.

16. P.W.1 has stated that he underwent surgery and

implants were fixed and he was discharged on 01.04.2016.

Again, he was admitted in Victoria Hospital on 16.04.2016 and

underwent skin grafting surgery and discharged on 25.04.2016.

He filed Ex.P.5-wound certificate, Ex.P.11-discharge summary.

The claimant examined P.W.2-Doctor and got marked Ex.P.31-

inpatient case sheet through him. The claimant also examined

Medical Record Technician as P.W.3 and got marked Exs.P.33

to P.35 through him. It was observed that the claimant took

treatment for a period of 25 days and as such, Rs.70,000/- was

granted for pain and suffering. P.W.1 also filed Exs.P.12 to 14

i.e. OPD slips, medical bills and medical prescriptions

respectively. Based on the same, Rs.20,050/- was granted by

the Tribunal towards medical expenses and Rs.10,000/- for

special diet and convenience.

- 14 -

C/W

17. P.W.1 has further stated that he was getting salary

of Rs.12,000/- per month and in view of the accident, he could

not walk. He produced Exs.P.8 to P.10 and P.21. The Tribunal

observed that he has not filed appointment letter or bank

account to prove his income. As per Ex.P.10, he was getting a

salary of Rs.8,000/- per month and he was aged 50 years as

per Ex.P.21. Therefore, the Tribunal assessed the notional

income of the claimant as Rs.8,000/- per month. Learned

counsel for the claimant contended that in view of the

guidelines given to the Karnataka State Legal Services

Authority, requested this Court to consider the notional income

at Rs.9,500/- per month as the accident was occurred in the

year 2016. In this case, the claimant has claimed his income as

Rs.12,000/- per month and filed certain documents. But he has

not examined the employer and failed to prove the income. As

such, the Tribunal has rightly assessed his income as

Rs.8,000/- per month and this Court finds no reason to

interfere with the said order.

- 15 -

C/W

18. P.W.2 has stated that the claimant sustained

permanent physical disability at 38.39% to the right lower limb

and 19.19% to the whole body. He also denied that the

fracture of claimant was well united. The Tribunal, considering

the age and occupation of the claimant and also the medical

records, taken permanent disability of the claimant to the

whole body as 12%. Since P.W.2-Doctor assessed the whole

body disability as 19.19%, this Court finds it just and

unreasonable to consider the said disability for the purpose of

calculation of loss of income due to disability at Rs.2,39,491/-

(8000 x 19.19% x 12 x 13).

19. Though learned counsel for the insurance company

submits that compensation granted under the head pain and

suffering is excessive but no amounts were granted under the

heads loss of earnings and loss of amenities. Therefore, this

Court finds that the amount of Rs.70,000/- granted under the

head pain and suffering is reasonable and needs no

interference.

- 16 -

C/W

20. The amounts granted by the Tribunal under the other

heads are reasonable and there is no need for interference.

21. Learned counsel for the insurance company submits

that interest granted at 9% per annum by the Tribunal is

excessive. Hence, this Court feels to reduce the same to 6%

per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

22. Therefore, The award of compensation granted by

the Tribunal in M.V.C. No.2566/2016 is modified as under:

                    Heads                       Amount in Rs.

  1. For pain and sufferings, mental agony           70,000.00

  2. Actual Medical Expenses                         20,050.00

  3. For Special diet and Conveyance                 10,000.00

  4. For loss of earning during                      32,000.00
     treatment period

  5. Loss of income due to permanent               2,39,491.00
     disability

  6. Future Medical expenses                         20,000.00

                    TOTAL                         3,91,541.00
                                      - 17 -


                                                                 C/W

23. Thus, the claimant in M.V.C. No.2566/2016 is

entitled for the compensation of Rs. 3,91,541/- with interest at

the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date

of realization as against Rs.3,01,810/- granted by the Tribunal.

24. In the result, the following order is passed:

(i) All the appeals are allowed in part.

(ii) The claimants in M.V.C. No.2567/2016 are

entitled for the total compensation of

Rs.13,99,930/- with interest at 6% p.a. from

the date of petition till realization.