Karnataka High Court
The Branch Manager vs Smt. Hulagevva D/O Durgappa Pujari on 24 November, 2025
Author: S G Pandit
Bench: S G Pandit
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
MFA.CROB No. 100106 of 2023
C/W MFA No. 101001 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.
MFA CROSS OBJ NO.100106 OF 2023 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101001 OF 2023 (MV-D)
IN MFA.CROB NO.100106/2023:
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. LATA W/O PARASAPPA PUJARI
AGE. 22 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
R/O KAMAKERI, TQ. RAMDURG, DIST. BELAGAVI 591114.
2. KUMARI. BAGIRATHI D/O PARASAPPA PUJARI
AGE. 03 YEARS, R/BY NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER I.E.
CROSS OBJECTOR NO.1-591114.
...CROSS OBJECTORS
(BY SRI. SANTOSH B. RAWOOT, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
CHANDRASHEKAR
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI P.B. ROAD 57, VIKAS COMPLEX STATION ROAD,
HUBBALLI, NOW R/BY REGIONAL MANAGER -580009.
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN KATTIMANI
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA
2. SMT. HULAGEVVA D/O DURGAPPA PUJARI
DHARWAD BENCH
AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O RANJANAGI, POST. UTTUR,
TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT 587313.
3. SHRI. NIRUPADI S/O HANUMANT MADIWATAR
AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O HIREKOPPA, TQ. RAMDURG,
DIST. BELAGAVI 591114.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MADHUKESHWAR A. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. PAVAN DODDATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R3-DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
MFA.CROB No. 100106 of 2023
C/W MFA No. 101001 of 2023
HC-KAR
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.101001/2023 FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 09.12.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.378/2020 ON THE FILE OF
THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XIV, MUDHOL,
AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.22,44,468/- WITH INTEREST AT
9 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS
REALIZATION & ETC.
IN MFA NO. 101001/2023:
BETWEEN:
THE BRANCH MANAGER,
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
P.B. NO.57, VIKAS COMPLEX STATION ROAD,
HUBBALLI, NOW R/BY REGIONAL MANAGER.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. MADHUKESHWAR A. DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. HULAGEVVA D/O DURGAPPA PUJARI
AGE. 46 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. RANJANAGI, POST UTTUR,
TALUK. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT 587313.
2. SMT. LATA W/O PARASAPPA PUJARI
AGE. 22 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. KAMAKERI, TQ. RAMDURG, DIST. BELAGAVI 591114.
3. KUMARI BAGIRATHI D/O PARASAPPA PUJARI
AGE. 3 YEARS, R/BY NATURAL GUARDIAN
MOTHER I.E RESPONDENT NO.2.
4. SRI. NIRUPADI S/O HANUMANT MADIWALAR
AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE,
R/O. HIREKOPPA, TQ. RAMDURG, DIST. BELAGAVI 591114.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PAVAN B. DODDATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. SANTOSH B. RAWOOT, ADVOCATE FOR C/R2 & R3;
SRI. D.M. MALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
THIS MFA FILED UNDER SEC.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES
ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
09.12.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.378/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XIV, MUDHOL, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.22,44,468/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT
P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION & ETC.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
MFA.CROB No. 100106 of 2023
C/W MFA No. 101001 of 2023
HC-KAR
THE MFA CROB. & THE MFA, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION,
THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT)
Though these appeal as well as cross objection are
listed for admission, they are taken up for final disposal,
with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties.
2. The insurer is in appeal in MFA No.101001/2023
challenging the liability saddled on it as well as quantum of
compensation, whereas, the claimants are in cross
objection in MFA Crob No.100106/2023 praying for
enhancement of compensation, not being satisfied with the
quantum of compensation awarded under judgment and
award dated 09.12.2022 passed in MVC No.378/2020 on
the file of Member, MACT-XIV, Mudhol (for short,
'Tribunal').
3. The claimant, mother of the deceased
Parasappa Pujari, filed a claim petition under Section 166
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Tribunal
seeking compensation for the accidental death of one
Parasappa Pujari, that took place on 20.03.2020 involving
two motorcycles bearing registration No.KA-48/EA-3940 &
KA-69/E-4048. It is stated that the deceased was aged
about 27 years as on the date of the accident and was
doing agricultural work, earning a sum Rs.12,000/- per
month.
4. On service of notice, the respondents appeared
before the Tribunal through their respective counsels and
filed statement of objections denying the entire claim
petition averments. Respondent No.4-Insurer contended
that the accident occurred due to sole negligence of
deceased rider of motorcycle in question. It was further
contended that respondent No.3 entrusted his motorcycle
to the rider, who was not having valid and effective driving
license. It was further contended that the deceased-rider
was also not having valid and effective driving license as
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
on the date of accident. Thus, sought for dismissal of the
claim petition.
5. Before the Tribunal, the claimant, who is none
other than mother of the deceased, examined herself as
PW1 apart from marking the documents as Exs.P1 to P7.
The respondent-insurer examined its Administrative Officer
as RW1 and marked ten documents as Exs.R1 to R10. The
Tribunal on scrutiny of entire material on record awarded a
total compensation of Rs.22,44,468/- with interest at 9%
per annum from the date of petition till the date of
realization on the following heads:
Loss of dependency Rs.20,94,468/-
Loss of consortium Rs. 40,000/-
Loss of estate Rs. 15,000/-
Transportation & funeral expenses Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of love and affection Rs. 80,000/-
-------------------
Total Rs.22,44,468/-
-------------------
6. While awarding the above compensation, the
Tribunal assessed notional income of the deceased at
Rs.11,000/- per month, applied multiplier of 17, deducted
1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased and
added 40% of the assessed income of the deceased
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
towards future prospects. The insurer is in appeal
challenging the liability as well as quantum of
compensation, whereas the claimants are in cross
objection praying for enhancement of compensation, not
being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded
by the Tribunal.
7. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Madhukeshwar
Deshpande for the appellant-Insurer, learned counsel Sri.
Santosh B Rawoot for the cross objectors-claimants and
perused the appeal papers including original records of the
Tribunal.
8. Sri. Madhukeshwar Deshpande, learned counsel
for the appellant-Insurer in support of his appeal
strenuously contended that the Tribunal without taking
note that the rider of the motorcycle bearing registration
No.KA-69/E-4048 was not having valid and effective
driving license as on the date of accident, erroneously
saddled the entire liability on the insurer to satisfy the
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
award. Thus, he prays to fasten the entire liability on the
owner of the offending motorcycle.
9. As regards the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal, Sri.Madhukeshwar Deshpande
submits that the quantum of compensation awarded by
the Tribunal is just and proper, which needs no
interference. He further submits that the Tribunal could
not have granted 9% interest on the compensation
amount and he prays for reducing the same from 9% to
6% per annum. Thus, he prays for allowing the appeal
filed by the Insurer and seeks to dismiss the cross-
objection filed by the claimants.
10. Per contra, Sri.Santosh B Rawoot, learned
counsel for the cross-objectors/claimants would contend
that notional income of the deceased assessed by the
Tribunal at Rs.11,000/- per month is on the lower side, as
the notional income fixed by KSLSA for the accident of the
year 2020 is Rs.13,750/- per month. Thus, learned
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
counsel prays for allowing the cross-objection filed by the
claimants by enhancing the compensation.
11. Having heard the learned counsel for both the
parties and on perusal of the appeal papers along with
original records, the following points would arise for our
consideration:
a) Whether the liability saddled on the
Insurer is proper and correct?
b) Whether the claimants would be
entitled to enhanced compensation?
12. Our answer to the above points would be in the
"negative" and "affirmative" respectively for the following
reasons:
13. The occurrence of the accident on 20.03.2020
involving two motorcycles bearing registration No.KA-
48/EA-3940 & KA-69/E-4048, resultant death of the
deceased Parasappa Pujari is not in dispute. The Insurer
is in appeal questioning the liability as well as quantum of
compensation granted, whereas the claimants are in cross
objection seeking enhancement of compensation.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
14. It is the contention of the Insurer that the rider
of the motorcycle bearing reg.No.KA-69/E-4048 was not
having valid and effective driving license as on the date of
the accident and therefore, the insurer is not liable to pay
compensation. It is an admitted fact that the rider of the
offending motorcycle was not having valid and effective
driving license as on the date of the accident. However,
the Tribunal committed an error in saddling the entire
liability on the insurer to satisfy the award. The Full Bench
of this Court in the case of New India Assurance Co.
Ltd. Vs. Yallavva & Another1, has held that, in an
accidental claim for compensation, where the driver/rider
of the offending vehicle was not holding a valid and
effective driving licence as on the date of the accident, it is
a case of "Pay and Recover", i.e., the insurance company
shall pay the compensation to the claimants, at the first
instance, with liberty to recover the same from the owner
of the vehicle. In the instant case also, in terms of the
2020 (2) KCCR 1405
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
aforesaid decision of the Full Bench of this Court, it is for
the insurance company to satisfy the claim at the first
instance and thereafter it would be at liberty to recover
the same from the owner of the motorcycle bearing
reg.No.KA-69/E-4048.
15. As regards the quantum of compensation, the
Tribunal has assessed notional income of the deceased at
Rs.11,000/- per month. The claimants in order to prove
the avocation and earning of the deceased have not
produced any cogent or acceptable document. In the
absence of any documentary evidence to establish the
avocation and income of the deceased, this Court and Lok
Adalath while settling the accidental claims of the year
2020, would normally assess notional income at
Rs.13,750/- per month, taking note of the income chart
prepared by KSLSA based on various factors including the
minimum wage fixed. Therefore, in the instant case also,
in the absence of any corroborative document to establish
the income of the deceased, we are of the opinion that it
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
would be just and appropriate for us to determine notional
income of the deceased at Rs.13,750/- p.m., taking note
of the income chart prepared by KSLSA and also the
minimum wage fixed.
16. There is no dispute with regard to age of the
deceased at 27 years, applicable multiplier of 17, addition
of 40% of the assessed income towards future prospects
and the deduction of 1/3rd towards personal and living
expenses of the deceased, as there are three dependents.
Accordingly, the claimants would be entitled to modified
compensation on the head of loss of dependency at
Rs.26,18,000/- (Rs.13,750 + 40/100 x 12 x 17x 2/3).
17. It is well settled law that each claimants would
be entitled to Rs.44,000/- towards loss of consortium as
held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Magma
General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram &
Others2, including 10% escalation. In terms of decision of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance
2018 ACJ 2782
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others3, the
claimants would be entitled to Rs.16,500/- towards loss
of estate and Rs.16,500/- towards transportation of dead
body and funeral expenses including 10% escalation.
Thus, the claimants would be entitled for modified
compensation on the following heads:
Sl. Particulars Amount
No.
1. Loss of dependency Rs.26,18,000/-
2. Loss of estate & Funeral expenses Rs. 33,000/-
3. Loss of Consortium (Rs.44,000/- Rs. 1,32,000/-
each)
Total Rs.27,83,000/-
18. The Tribunal committed an error in awarding
rate of interest at 9% per annum, which is on the higher
side. Taking note of the present rate of Bank interest, we
are inclined to reduce the rate of interest on the
compensation amount from 9% awarded by the Tribunal
to 6% per annum.
19. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.27,83,000/- as against
AIR 2017 SC 5157
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
Rs.22,44,468/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at
the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till
date of realization.
20. In the result, we proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
a) Appeal as well as cross objection are
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.27,83,000/- as
against Rs.22,44,468/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
c) The entire compensation amount shall
carry interest at the rate of 6% per
annum from the date of petition till
date of realization.
d) The respondent/insurer is directed to
pay compensation to the claimants at
the first instance and thereafter
recover the same from the owner of
the offending motorcycle bearing
reg.No.KA-69/E-4048.
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16218-DB
HC-KAR
e) 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.
f) Apportionment, deposit &
disbursement shall be made as per
the award of the Tribunal.
g) The amount in deposit, if any, be
transmitted to the concerned Tribunal
forthwith along with TCR.
h) Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/-
(S G PANDIT)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(GEETHA K.B.)
JUDGE
JTR
CT:VP
