[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Channegowda vs Singrigowda on 28 November, 2025

                                               -1-
                                                         NC: 2025:KHC:50058-DB
                                                         MFA No. 6245 of 2018
                                                     C/W MFA No. 8484 of 2017

                   HC-KAR




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                         DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
                                            PRESENT
                              THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
                                              AND
                            THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
                   MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6245 OF 2018(MV-D)
                                              C/W
                   MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8484 OF 2017(MV-D)


                   IN MFA No. 6245/2018

                   BETWEEN:

                         CHANNEGOWDA
                         AGED 50 YEARS
                         SINCE DED BY LRS

                   1.    LAKSHMAMMA
                         AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS
                         W/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA
Digitally signed
by PANKAJA S
                   2.    KESHAVEGOWDA
Location: HIGH
COURT OF                 AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
KARNATAKA                S/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA

                   3.    GEETHA
                         AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
                         D/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA

                   4.    NAGARAJA
                         S/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA
                         AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

                         ALL ARE R/A YAREHALLI VILLAGE
                         MANCHANAHALLI POST,
                           -2-
                                     NC: 2025:KHC:50058-DB
                                    MFA No. 6245 of 2018
                                C/W MFA No. 8484 of 2017

HC-KAR




     KASABA HOBLI
     HASSAN TALUK
                                             ...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. KAVITHA H.C, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.   SINGRIGOWDA
     S/O LATE MELEGOWDA
     R/O B KATIHALLI VILLAGE
     GAVENHALLI POST, KASABA HOBLI
     HASSAN-573 201
     (OWNER OF MOTOR BIKE BEARING
     REGISTRATION NO.KA-13-L-9381)

2.   THE MANAGER
     THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
     COMPANY LIMITED, CHANDANA COMPLEX
     HARSHA MAHAL ROAD, HASSAN
     POLICY NO.673401311201014891
     VALID 27.03.2013 TO 26.03.2014
                                           ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. A.N. KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2,
    R1 - SERVED - UNREPRESENTED)

     MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 03.06.2017 PASSED IN MVC
NO.1219/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, HASSAN, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.

IN MFA NO. 8484/2017

BETWEEN:

1.   THE MANAGER
     THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.,
     CHANDANA COMPLEX, HARSHA
     MAHAL ROAD, HASSAN,
                           -3-
                                    NC: 2025:KHC:50058-DB
                                    MFA No. 6245 of 2018
                                C/W MFA No. 8484 of 2017

HC-KAR




     NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS,
     REGIONAL MANAGER,
     NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.,
     REGIONAL OFFICE, 2-B,
     UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE, P.
     KALINGA RAO ROAD, BENGALURU-560 027

                                         ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. A.N KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE)

AND:

     CHANNEGOWDA
     SINCE DEAD BY LRS

1.   SMT. LAKSHMAMMA,
     W/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA,
     AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,

2.   KESHAVEGOWDA
     S/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA,
     NOW AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS

3.   GEETHA
     D/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA,
     NOW AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS

4.   NAGARAJA
     S/O LATE CHANNEGOWDA,
     NOW AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS

     ALL R/O YAREHALLI VILLAGE,
     MANICHANAHALLI POST,
     KASABA HOBLI, HASSAN-573 201

5.   SINGRIGOWDA
     S/O LATE MELEGOWDA, MAJOR,
     R/O KATIHALLI VILLAGE,
     GAVENHALLI POST,
     KASABA HOBLI,
                            -4-
                                     NC: 2025:KHC:50058-DB
                                     MFA No. 6245 of 2018
                                 C/W MFA No. 8484 of 2017

HC-KAR




     HASSAN-573 201
                                       ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. KAVITHA H.C, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R4,
    R5 - SERVED - UNREPRESENTED)

    THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.06.2017 PASSED
IN MVC NO.1219/2014 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, HASSAN. AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.6,61,185/- WITH INTEREST @
8%P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.

     THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
         and
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

                    ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K)

1. In respect of an accident occurred on 17.02.2014

and facts, which are not in dispute, the Tribunal vide

judgment and award dated 03.06.2017 has awarded a

sum of Rs.6,61,185/- as compensation towards the death

of one Channegowda, who was a pillion rider. Aggrieved

by the award, the claimants have filed MFA.6245/2018

seeking enhancement of compensation, the insurer has

filed MFA.8484/2018 challenging the liability and quantum.

NC: 2025:KHC:50058-DB

HC-KAR

2. The learned counsel for the claimants contended that

the sums awarded by the Tribunal under different heads

are meager. He also contended that the Tribunal has not

properly assessed the income of the deceased, who was

working as a Watchman, Coolie and Agriculturist and was

earning Rs.25,000/- per month. As such, he prays to allow

the appeal of the claimants by enhancing the

compensation and dismiss the appeal of the insurer.

3. To buttress her arguments as regards the nexus

between the injury and death and the consequent

prosecution of claim petition by the legal representatives,

she relied on the following judgments:

1. Afsana and Others vs. Kundu Knit Fab Pvt. Ltd. and another - 2022 ACJ 754;

2. Dhannalal Alias Dhanraj (Dead) Thr. LRs.

vs. Nasir Khan and Others - 2025 SCC OnLine 2083;

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the insurer contended

that the Tribunal has grossly erred in saddling liability on

NC: 2025:KHC:50058-DB

HC-KAR

the insurer though the death of Channegowda had no

nexus with the injuries sustained by him in the accident

occurred on 17.02.2014, that too when said Channegowda

died on 09.05.2015 nearly after 15 months from the date

of the accident. He also contended that the sums awarded

under different heads and the award of interest are

exorbitant. He also contended that the Tribunal has failed

to notice the provisions of Section 306 of Indian

Succession Act before permitting the claimants-the legal

heirs of deceased to come on record. As such, he prays to

allow the appeal of the insurer and dismiss the appeal of

the claimants.

5. We have carefully perused the impugned award and

also the Trial Court records.

6. The accident in question is not in dispute. However,

the death of Channegowda due to the accident is in

dispute. As could be gathered from records, the accident

had occurred on 17.02.2014 and Channegowda died on

NC: 2025:KHC:50058-DB

HC-KAR

09.05.2015 i.e., much later after his discharge while his

wounds were not completely healed. Further, as per the

evidence of the Doctor, septicemia or death due to fat

embolism can occur as sudden event. Even he has opined

that the risk of heart attack is more with the persons who

suffered amputation and that amputation may lead to

depression and other diseases. Since, Channegowda was

bedridden and had suffered septicemia, there is strong

probability that Channegowda died due to the direct result

of injuries sustained by him in the accident. The judgment

cited supra supports the aforesaid aspect.

7. Further, as the relationship between the deceased

Channegowda and the claimants is not in dispute, the

contention of the learned counsel for the insurer that they

are not entitled for compensation cannot be accepted. As

such, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal has rightly

come to the conclusion that the death was due to the

NC: 2025:KHC:50058-DB

HC-KAR

accident and has rightly saddled the liability on the

insurer.

8. As regards quantum of compensation, since the

accident was of the year 2014, it would be appropriate to

adopt the notional income determined by the Karnataka

State Legal Services, which would be Rs.8,500/-. Since the

deceased was aged 58 years as on the date of the

accident and was self employed, 10% requires to be added

towards future prospects and the multiplier to be adopted

is '9' and 1/3rd requires to be deducted towards personal

expenses. Thus, the claimants would be entitled to the

loss of dependency at Rs.6,73,272/- (Rs.8,500 + 10% -

1/3 X 12 X 9).

9. The claimant No.1, being the wife is only entitled for

Rs.48,400/- towards loss of consortium as the other

claimants were not dependent on the deceased. The

claimants were also entitled for Rs.36,300/- under

conventional heads as per the judgment in the case of

NC: 2025:KHC:50058-DB

HC-KAR

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS.

PRANAY SETHI & OTHERS - (2017) 16 SCC 680.

10. Thus, the claimants, in modification of the impugned

award, would be entitled to the following sums:

Sl.

                                                     Amount
                       Particulars                      (In
                                                        Rs.)

      1.    Loss of Dependency                        6,73,272
      2.    Loss of Consortium                          48,400

      3.    Conventional Heads                          36,300

                         Total                       7,57,972



11.    Thus,    the    claimants       would   be    entitled    for

compensation      of    Rs.7,57,972/-          as     against    the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.6,61,185/-

along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum instead of

8% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.

- 10 -

NC: 2025:KHC:50058-DB

HC-KAR

12. The insurer is directed to deposit the amount of

compensation awarded within a period of two months from

the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.