Karnataka High Court
Smt Nagamma vs Sri Harisha M S on 19 August, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:32038-DB
MFA No. 123 of 2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.123 OF 2020 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. NAGAMMA
W/O. KRISHNAPPA @ KRISHNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS.
2. SRI KRISHNAPPA @ KRISHNEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
S/O. LATE SIDDEGOWDA.
BOTH ARE RESIDING AT
HANUMANALU VILLAGE
BANNUR HOBLI
T. NARASIPURA TALUK
MYSURU DISTRICT-571 101.
ALSO AT
ARAKERE VILLAGE AND HOBLI
Digitally signed by
MOUNESHWARAPPA
SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK
NAGARATHNA
Location: High Court
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 415.
of Karnataka
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. S. NAGANANDINI, ADVOCATE, FOR SRI JAIRAJ G.)
AND:
1. SRI HARISHA M.S.
MAJOR
S/O. M.P. SUBRAYA
RESIDING AT AGALAGANDI VILLAGE
MEGUNDA HOBLI
KOPPA TALUK
CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577 139.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:32038-DB
MFA No. 123 of 2020
HC-KAR
2. THE MANAGER
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
P.B. NO.315-2951, J.L.B. ROAD
CHAMUNDIPURAM-570 004
MYSURU-571 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. NISHA REBELLO, ADVOCATE, FOR
SRI A.M. VENKATESH, FOR R-2)
***
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V. ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 11-6-2019 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.628 OF 2018 ON
THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND M.A.C.T.,
SRIRANGAPATNA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN
AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)
This appeal is filed by the claimants being aggrieved by
the judgment and award dated 11-6-2019 passed in M.V.C.
No.628 of 2018 on the files of the Additional Senior Civil
Judge and Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Srirangapatna,
whereby, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.10,26,352/- as
compensation with interest at the rate of 9% per annum
from the date of petition till the date of deposit.
NC: 2025:KHC:32038-DB
HC-KAR
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein shall
be referred to in terms of their status before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 2-3-2018 at about
2:45 a.m., Sri Manjunatha (hereinafter referred to as
'deceased') was traveling on goods Auto, bearing
Registration No.KA-55 4820, on Bannuru Road, Ring Road
Junction, near Devegowda Circle, Alanahalli, Mysuru, at that
time, the driver of Maruti Swift Desire car, bearing
Registration No.KA-05 MP-8698, drove it in a rash and
negligent manner with excessive speed and dashed against
the goods Auto of the deceased. Due to this, the deceased
sustained grievous injuries and he succumbed to injuries on
the spot. Due to his death, mother and father of the
deceased lost their dependency and hence, claimed
compensation under various heads.
4. Heard Smt. S. Naganandini, learned counsel for
Sri Jairag G., learned counsel for the appellants-claimants,
Smt. Nisha Rebello, learned counsel for Sri A.M. Venkatesh,
NC: 2025:KHC:32038-DB
HC-KAR
learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company,
and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants-claimants has
contended that the deceased was working as an Auto driver
and earning monthly income of Rs.20,000/-, but the Tribunal
notionally considered monthly income at Rs.7,500/-, which is
meager one. Further, the Tribunal has added only 25% of
the income towards future prospects, however, it must be
40%. Hence, she prays to enhance the compensation.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent No.2-
Insurance Company, supports the impugned judgment and
award of the Tribunal and submits that considering the oral
and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded
just and reasonable compensation under each heads, which
does not call for interference at the hands of this Court.
Thus, she prays to dismiss the appeal.
7. As there is no dispute regarding the death of the
deceased in a road traffic accident occurred on
2-3-2018 due to rash and negligent driving of the car,
NC: 2025:KHC:32038-DB
HC-KAR
bearing Registration No.KA-05 MP-8698, by its driver and
liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the only point
that arises for our consideration in this appeal is:
"Whether the quantum of compensation awarded
by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it
call for enhancement?"
8. After hearing both the learned counsel and perusal
of the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal, we are
of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
on lower side. The Tribunal has taken the income of the
deceased at Rs.7,500/- per month without any proof. No
documentary evidence is placed on record with regard to
income of the deceased. In the absence of any proof of
income, taking note of the Circular issued by the Karnataka
Legal Services Authority as well as the High Court Legal
Services Committee, Bengaluru, we deem it appropriate to
reassess the notional income of the deceased at Rs.12,500/-
per month.
NC: 2025:KHC:32038-DB
HC-KAR
9. As per the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay
Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, 40% of
the income must be added towards future prospects, which
comes to Rs.5,000/- (12,500 X 40%) and the total income
comes to Rs.17,500/- per month (12,500 + 5,000). The
claimants, i.e. mother and father of the deceased, are the
dependents of the deceased and the deceased was a
bachelor. Therefore, 50% of the income shall be deducted
towards the personal expenses of the deceased and it works
out to Rs.8,750/- per month (17,500 X 50%). The deceased
was aged 30 years as on the date of the accident. Hence,
the applicable multiplier would be '17' and it works out to
Rs.17,85,000/- (8,750 X 12 X 17). This would be the 'loss of
dependency' as against Rs.9,56,352/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
10. In the case of Magma General Insurance Co.
Ltd. v. Nanu Ram alias Chuhru Ram and Others reported
in (2018) 18 SCC 130, the Hon'ble Apex Court by referring
to the decision of the Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi's
NC: 2025:KHC:32038-DB
HC-KAR
case, stated supra, has discussed about granting the
compensation under the head of 'loss of consortium' and has
also issued guidelines for grant of 'spousal consortium',
'parental consortium' and 'filial consortium'. The claimants
are the mother and the father of the deceased. In view of
the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the
aforesaid decision, the claimants are entitled to
compensation of Rs.80,000/- (Rs.40,000/- each) towards
'loss of consortium' as against Rs.40,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
11. Further, Rs.15,000/- towards 'funeral expenses'
and Rs.15,000/- towards 'loss of estate' awarded by the
Tribunal are maintained.
12. The Tribunal has saddled the liability on the
deceased at 15% and on the Insurance Company at 85%.
The finding of the Tribunal with regard to contributory
negligence is just and proper. Hence, no interference is
called for in this regard.
NC: 2025:KHC:32038-DB
HC-KAR
13. Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following
compensation:
HEADS Rs.
Loss of dependency 17,85,000.00
Loss of consortium 80,000.00
Loss of estate 15,000.00
Funeral expenses 15,000.00
TOTAL 18,95,000.00
Less: Compensation awarded by the
10,26,355.00
Tribunal
TOTAL 8,68,648.00
Less: Negligence contributed by the
1,30,297.00
deceased at 15%
ENHANCED COMPENSATION 7,38,351.00
14. In the result, we pass the following
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed-in-part.
ii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal are
modified to the extent stated hereinabove. The
claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of
Rs.7,38,351/- with interest at the rate of 6% per
annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the
date of realisation.
NC: 2025:KHC:32038-DB
HC-KAR
iii. Respondent No.2-Insurance Company is directed to
deposit the enhanced compensation together with
interest within four weeks' from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment.
iv. Apportionment, disbursement, and deposit of the
enhanced compensation shall be made in terms of the
award of the Tribunal.
v. Draw a modified award accordingly.
vi. No order as to costs.
Sd/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
KVK
