Karnataka High Court
Smt. Shobha W/O Dagadu Mane vs Mukhesh S/O Sohanlal Jain And Ors on 17 June, 2025
Author: Mohammad Nawaz
Bench: Mohammad Nawaz
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
MFA No. 200924 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200992 of 2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200924 OF 2021 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200992 OF 2020 (MV-D)
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200924 OF 2021:
BETWEEN:
SMT. SHOBHA
W/O DAGADU MANE,
AGE: 27 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: KORAVALI,
Digitally signed
by
TQ: MOHAL,
BASALINGAPPA
SHIVARAJ
DIST: SOLAPUR.
DHUTTARGAON NOW RESIDING AT TAJPUR,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF TQ & DIST: VIJAYAPURA - 586 102.
KARNATAKA
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. KOUJALAGI CHANDRAKANT LAXMAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MUKHESH
S/O SOHANLAL JAIN
AGE: 56 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: JAWASIYA,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
MFA No. 200924 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200992 of 2020
HC-KAR
DIST: MANDSAUR,
MADHYA PRADESH - 458 001.
2. THE MANAGER LEGAL,
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
BEHIND SIDDESHWAR TEMPLE,
VIJAYAPURA - 586 101.
3. ANKUSH
S/O SHAHU MANE,
AGE: 61 YEARS,
OCC: COOLIE,
R/AT: KAMATI,
TQ: MOHAL,
DIST: SOLAPUR - 413 001.
(MAHARASHTRA STATE)
4. THAYI
W/O ANKUSH MANE,
AGE: 56 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: KAMATI,
TQ: MOHAL,
DIST: SOLAPUR - 413 001.
(MAHARASHTRA STATE)
5. VANDANA
D/O ANKUSH MANE,
AGE: 29 YEARS,
OCC: NIL,
R/O: KAMATI,
TQ: MOHAL,
DIST: SOLAPUR - 413 001.
(MAHARASHTRA STATE)
...RESPONDENTS
(NOTICE TO R1, R3, R4 & R5 DISPENSED WITH;
SRI. RAHUL R. ASTURE, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF M.V. ACT 1988, PRAYING TO ISSUE
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.05.2020
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
MFA No. 200924 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200992 of 2020
HC-KAR
PASSED IN MVC NO.1243/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT
OF THE IV ADDL. DIST. JUDGE AND MEMBER MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.XIII, VIJAYAPUR AT
VIJAYAPURA. AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY ENHANCING THE
COMPENSATION AMOUNT OF RS.39,27,000/- ONLY AS
CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THIS HONOURABLE
COURT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
IN MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.200992 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGER LEGAL,
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
BEHIND SIDDESHWAR TEMPLE,
VIJAYAPUR - 586 101.
THROUGH AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAHUL R. ASTURE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MUKHESH
S/O SOHANLAL JAIN
AGE: 56 YEARS,
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: JAWASIYA,
DIST: MANDSAUR,
MADHYA PRADESH - 458 001.
2. ANKUSH
S/O SHAHU MANE,
AGE: 61 YEARS,
OCC: COOLIE,
R/AT: KAMATI,
TQ: MOHAL,
DIST: SOLAPUR - 413 213.
3. THAYI
W/O ANKUSH MANE,
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
MFA No. 200924 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200992 of 2020
HC-KAR
AGE: 56 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O: KAMATI,
TQ: MOHAL,
DIST: SOLAPUR - 413 213.
4. VANDANA
D/O ANKUSH MANE,
AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: KAMATI,
TQ: MOHAL,
DIST: SOLAPUR - 413 213..
5. SMT. SHOBHA
W/O. DAGADU MANE,
AGE:27 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
R/O: KORAVALI,
TQ:MOHAL,
DIST: SOLAPUR,
NOW RESIDING AT TAJPUR,
TQ & DIST: VIJAYPUR - 586 101.
...RESPONDENTS
(SRI. KOUJALAGI CHANDRAKANT LAXMAN ADV. FOR R5;
R1 TO R4 ARE SERVED)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.ACT 1988, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE
THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.05.2020
PASSED BY THE MACT-XIII AND FOURTH ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT JUDGE AT VIJAYAPUR, IN M.V.C NO.1243/2014, BY
ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND TO GRANT SUCH ANY OTHER
RELIEF AS THIS HON'BLE COURT DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS
AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ
AND
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
MFA No. 200924 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 200992 of 2020
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K S HEMALEKHA)
Being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated
11.05.2020 in M.V.C.No.1243/2014 on the file of the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.XIII and IV Additional
District Judge, Vijayapur, (hereinafter referred to as
'Tribunal' for short), the claimant has preferred appeal in
M.F.A.No.200924/2021 seeking enhancement of
compensation, while the Insurance Company has preferred
appeal in M.F.A.No.200992/2020 seeking reduction of
compensation awarded.
Brief facts of the case:
2. In a road traffic accident that occurred on
26.02.2014, one Dagadu Mane, who was riding the
motorcycle bearing registration No.MH-13/BH-5771 along
with his relative-Keshav, sustained fatal injuries when a
Truck bearing registration No.MP-14/HB-0230, came from
opposite side and collided with the motorcycle. As a result,
Dagadu Mane succumbed to the injuries. The appellant
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
claiming to be the wife of deceased filed claim petition
before the Tribunal seeking compensation of
Rs.55,50,000/-.
3. Initially, the claim petition was filed against
respondent Nos.1 and 2. During the course of the
proceedings, the claimant impleaded respondent Nos.3 to
5, who are father, mother and sister of deceased-Dagadu
Mane.
4. The Insurance Company-Respondent No.2
specifically denied its liability and opposed the quantum of
compensation sought by the claimant.
5. Respondent Nos.3 to 5 denied that the
claimant is the wife of deceased-Dagadu Mane. They
admitted their relationship with deceased-Dagadu Mane.
The respondent No.3 before the Tribunal contended that
respondent No.4 is the stepmother of deceased, as the
deceased was born through the first wife of respondent
No.3 and respondent No.4 is his second wife and not
entitled for compensation.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
6. The Tribunal after considering the oral and
documentary evidence on record, concluded that
deceased-Dagadu Mane, the son of Ankush Mane, died in
a road traffic accident that occurred on 26.02.2014, due to
rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Truck
bearing registration No.MP-14/HB-0230. Accordingly, the
Tribunal fastened the liability on the Insurance Company
to pay the compensation in a sum of Rs.16,23,000/- with
interest @ 6% per annum. However, the Tribunal held that
the appellant/claimant and respondent No.4 must
establish their legal status as the wife and
mother/stepmother of the deceased before a Competent
Civil Court. The Tribunal further observed that only upon
such declaration, could apportionment of the awarded
compensation be sought by the parties. Therefore, the
Tribunal did not pass any order regarding the
apportionment of the compensation.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant,
while reiterating the contentions raised in the appeal
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
memo, mainly would contend that the appellant/claimant
has proved that she is the legally wedded wife of the
deceased-Dagadu Mane. In support of this, the appellant
has filed I.A.No.1/2025 under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC
seeking to produce the certified copy of the order dated
22.06.2022 passed in Civil Misc. Application No.84/2021
on the file of the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) Madha taluk,
Dist. Solapur. By the said order, the appellant has been
declared as the legally wedded wife of deceased-Dagadu
Mane. In light of the said declaration, it is submitted that
the appellant/claimant is entitled to claim her lawful share
in the apportionment of compensation as per law.
8. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the
Insurance Company - respondent No.2 submits that the
appellant/claimant failed to establish before the Tribunal
that she is the legally wedded wife of deceased-Dagudu
Mane and the Tribunal having held and treated the
deceased as unmarried should have deducted 50% of his
income towards personal and living expenses rather than
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
applying 1/3rd deduction as was done by the Tribunal.
Therefore, it is submitted that the compensation awarded
is excessive and liable to be reduced accordingly.
9. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides,
the points that arises for consideration are:
1) Whether the appellant/claimant has proved
that she is the legally wedded wife of
deceased-Dagadu Mane in light of the order
dated 22.06.2022 passed in Civil Misc.
Application No.84/2021?
2) Whether the judgment and award passed by
the Tribunal warrants any interference in the
present facts and circumstances of this case?
10. It is to be noted here that respondent Nos.1, 3,
4 and 5 have been served in MFA No.200992/2020.
Further, by order of this Court dated 19.03.2025, notice to
respondents No.1, 3, 4 and 5 was dispensed with in MFA
No.200924/2021, as the said respondents have already
been served and remained unrepresented in the connected
appeal in MFA No.200922/2020 filed by the Insurance
Company.
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
11. Point No.1: The appellant in MFA
No.200924/2021 is the claimant before the Tribunal and
claims to be the legally wedded wife of deceased-Dagadu
Mane. On account of his death in the road traffic accident,
she sought compensation. The Tribunal while awarding
compensation of Rs.16,23,000/-, held that the accident
occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of
the offending vehicle and accordingly fastened the liability
on the Insurance Company. However, the Tribunal
refrained from apportioning the compensation, observing
that the appellant/claimant and respondent No.4 had not
proved their legal status as the wife and stepmother
respectively of the deceased-Dagadu Mane. Therefore, the
Tribunal directed to obtain appropriate declaration from
the competent Civil Court to establish their entitlement.
12. In compliance with the said direction, the
appellant has now produced a certified copy of the
judgment dated 22.06.2022 passed in Civil Miscellaneous
Application No.84/2021 on the file of the Court of Civil
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
Judge (Jr.Dn.) Taluka Madha, District Solapur. By the said
order, the appellant has been declared as the legal heir
and the wife of deceased-Dagadu Mane. This order
satisfies the condition imposed by the Tribunal and is
binding for the purpose of establishing her status. In view
of the same, we hold that the appellant/claimant is the
legally wedded wife of deceased-Dagadu Mane and is
entitled to compensation and apportionment. It was
contended by the respondent No.3 before the Tribunal that
respondent No.4 is the stepmother of the deceased and
she is his second wife. In this regard, it is to be noted
that a stepmother can be considered as a legal
representative under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act
1988, provided it is shown that she was dependent on the
deceased. In the instant case, there is no material on
record to establish or refute the dependency of respondent
No.4. However, considering her status as a legal
representative, a share has to be apportioned in her
favour.
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
13. Point No.2: While awarding compensation, the
Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.14,28,000/- towards
loss of dependency by taking the notional income of the
deceased at Rs.6,000/-p.m. in the absence of any material
evidence to establish the actual income of the deceased.
The Tribunal added 50% towards future prospects,
applying '17' multiplier considering the age of deceased as
26 years, and deducted 1/3rd towards personal and living
expenses. Though the learned counsel for the Insurance
Company - respondent No.2 disputed the marital status of
the deceased and contended that he was a bachelor and
therefore, 50% deduction has to be made towards
personal expenses, it has been established by the
appellant that the deceased was married and the appellant
is his legally wedded wife, hence, the deduction of 1/3rd is
appropriate.
14. However, it is to be noted that the Tribunal has
added 50% towards future prospects, whereas in view of
the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi
and others1 (Pranay Sethi), the correct addition for future
prospects in case of deceased aged below 40 years is
40%. Further, the notional income for the year 2014 as
per the Guidelines of the Karnataka State Legal Services
Authority ought to have been taken at Rs.7,500/- per
month instead of Rs.6,000/- p.m.
15. If the monthly income of the deceased is taken
at Rs.7,500/- and 40% is added towards future prospects
(as the deceased is aged about 26 years), the total
monthly income of the deceased comes to Rs.10,500/-.
Applying the multiplier 17, multiplying by 12 months and
deducting 1/3rd towards personal expenses
[Rs.10,500/- + (40%) x 12 x 17 x 2/3), the resulted loss
of dependency works out to Rs.14,28,000/- which is
correctly computed by the Tribunal.
(2017) 16 SCC 680
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
16. The Tribunal has awarded compensation as
under:
Heads Amount
Loss of dependency Rs.14,28,000/-
Funeral expenses Rs.20,000/-
Spousal consortium Rs.1,00,000/-
Parental consortium Rs.50,000/-
Filial consortium Rs.25,000/-
Total Rs.16,23,000/-
17. Upon re-assessment, the total compensation
payable would be as follows:
Heads Amount
Loss of dependency Rs.14,28,000/-
Funeral expenses Rs.15,000/-
Loss of estate Rs.15,000/-
Spousal consortium Rs.40,000/-
Parental consortium Rs.80,000/-
Filial consortium Rs.25,000/-
Total Rs.16,03,000/-
18. The Tribunal has awarded total compensation of
Rs.16,23,000/-. On re-assessment, the claimant is entitled
total compensation of Rs.16,03,000/-. The difference of
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
compensation is marginal. Therefore, this Court finds that
the award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and
does not warrant any interference. We answer the points
raised for consideration accordingly, and we pass the
following:
ORDER
i. MFA No.200924/2021 filed by the claimant
is allowed in part.
ii. MFA No.200992/2020 filed by the
Insurance Company is dismissed.
iii. The appellant/claimant and respondent
Nos.3 to 5 are entitled for compensation of
Rs.16,23,000/- with interest @ 6% per
annum till the date of realization as
awarded by the Tribunal.
iv. The appellant/claimant is entitled for 60%
of the total compensation amount awarded
by the Tribunal. Out of 60%, 40% of the
compensation amount shall be released in
favour of the appellant/claimant and
remaining 20% shall be kept in fixed
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:3153-DB
HC-KAR
deposit for a period of three years in any
nationalized bank and the
appellant/claimant is entitled to withdraw
the accrued interest.
v. Respondent No.3, the father of the
deceased-Dagadu Mane is entitled for 20%,
respondent Nos.4 and 5 are each entitled to
10% of the compensation amount and the
same shall be released in their favour.
vi. Amount in deposit in MFA No.200992/2020
is remitted back to the Tribunal.
vii. Trial Court records to be sent back to the
Tribunal.
viii. Pending I.As if any, do not survive for
consideration. Accordingly, same stand
disposed of.
Sd/-
(MOHAMMAD NAWAZ)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(K S HEMALEKHA)
JUDGE
CT:NI
