Karnataka High Court

Ranjana And Ors vs Fayaz Ahmed Patel And Ors on 14 October, 2025

Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad

Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad

                                               -1-
                                                       NC: 2025:KHC-K:6035-DB
                                                      MFA No. 200020 of 2024


                   HC-KAR




                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,

                                       KALABURAGI BENCH

                            DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025

                                            PRESENT
                          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
                                              AND
                          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY


                          MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200020 OF 2024 (MV-D)
                   BETWEEN:

                   1.   SMT. RANJANA W/O LATE TARANATH,
                        AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,

                   2.   NAMITA D/O LATE TARANATH,
                        AGE: 7 YEARS, MINOR,

                   3.   KIRAN S/O LATE TARANATH,
                        AGE: 5 YEARS, MINOR,
                        APPELLANTS NO. 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS,
Digitally signed        U/G OF THEIR MOTHER APPELLANT NO.1,
by RAMESH               ALL RESIDENCE OF LAKNAPUR,
MATHAPATI
Location: HIGH          SATHKHED, TQ. JEWARGI,
COURT OF                DIST: KALABURAGI.
KARNATAKA

                                                                ...APPELLANTS

                   (BY SRI. B.M. KINIKERI,ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.   FAYAZ AHMED PATEL S/O ABDUL RAHEEM,
                        AGE: MAJOR, OCC: PROPRIETOR M.R.
                        TOURS AND TRAVELS, KHB COMPLEX,
                        OPP. CENTRAL BUS STAND,
                        KALABURAGI-585 103.
                            -2-
                                    NC: 2025:KHC-K:6035-DB
                                  MFA No. 200020 of 2024


HC-KAR




2.   THE MANAGER,
     NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
     DR. RAJSHEKHAR PATIL'S BUILDING NO. 10-27,
     P.S. NO. 12, S.B. TEMPLE ROAD,
     KALABURAGI-585 102.

3.   VEENA BAI W/O BASAPPA,
     AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,

4.   BASAPPA S/O SOMANAYAK,
     AGE: 64 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
     BOTH R/O. LAKNAPUR,
     SATHKHED, TQ. JEWARGI,
     DIST. KALABURAGI-585 310.

                                          ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SUDARSHAN M. ADV. FOR R2
NOTICE TO R1, R3 AND R4 DISPENSED WITH)


      THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO CALL
FOR THE ENTIRE LOWER COURT RECORDS AND MODIFY THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18-2-2020 PASSED BY THE
LEARNED II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT AT
KALABURAGII IN MVC NO.434/2019 BY ENHANCING THE
COMPENSATION AMOUNT AS PRAYED IN CLAIM PETITION.

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:


CORAM:    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
          AND
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TYAGARAJA N. INAVALLY
                                -3-
                                      NC: 2025:KHC-K:6035-DB
                                     MFA No. 200020 of 2024


HC-KAR




                        ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD)

This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor

Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for

short) has been filed by the claimants being aggrieved by

the judgment and award dated 18.02.2020 passed by the

II Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kalaburagi (for short

'Claims Tribunal') in MVC No.434/2019.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal

briefly stated are that, on 21.12.2018 at about 3.15 p.m.,

when the deceased Taranath was traveling in Bus bearing

registration No.KA-32/C-8408 on Pune-Mohol High Way,

infront of Mohol Agricultural Firm, at that time, driver of

the said bus drove it with high speed in rash and negligent

manner and dashed to Mal Truck bearing registration

No.MH-25/U-2315 on its backside. As a result of the

aforesaid accident, the deceased sustained grievous

injuries and died on the spot.

NC: 2025:KHC-K:6035-DB

HC-KAR

3. The claimants filed a petition under Section 166

of the Act seeking compensation for the death of the

deceased along with interest.

4. On service of summons, the respondent Nos.1

and 2 appeared through their counsels and filed written

statement denying the averments made in the claim

petition.

5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the

Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded

the evidence. The claimants, in order to prove the case,

claimant No.1 examined herself as PW-1 and got exhibited

documents namely Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8. On the other hand,

respondents have not adduced any oral evidence.

However, got marked the insurance policy on consent as

Ex.R.1. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment,

inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of

rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its

driver, as a result of which, the deceased sustained

injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The Tribunal

NC: 2025:KHC-K:6035-DB

HC-KAR

further held that the claimants are entitled to a

compensation of Rs.17,00,000/- along with interest at the

rate of 6% p.a. and directed the respondent No.2 to

deposit the compensation amount along with interest.

Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.

6. The learned counsel for the claimants has raised

the following contentions:

a) Firstly, the claimants claim that the deceased was

aged about 28 years at the time of the accident the

deceased was working as driver in M.R. Tours and Travels

from the year 2015 to 2018 on monthly payment of

Rs.15,000/- plus Rs.400/- bhatta per day for 18 days

(excluding holidays) is getting total salary of Rs.22,200/-

per month. To that effect, he has produced salary

certificate issued by the employer at Ex.P.7 in spite of

that, the Tribunal has assessed the notional income of the

deceased as Rs.10,000/- per month is on lower side.

b) Secondly, as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble

Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE

NC: 2025:KHC-K:6035-DB

HC-KAR

CO. LTD. -v- PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS [AIR 2017

SC 5157], in case the deceased was self-employed or on

a fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established

income towards 'future prospects' should be the warrant

where the deceased was below the age of 40 years. The

same shall be considered.

c) Thirdly, as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in the case of MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE CO.

LTD. -V- NANU RAM [2018 ACJ 2782], each of the

claimants are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/-

under the head of 'loss of love and affection and

consortium'.

d) Fourthly, considering the age and avocation of the

deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the

Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, he prays for allowing

the appeal.

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the

Insurance Company has raised the following counter-

contentions:

NC: 2025:KHC-K:6035-DB

HC-KAR

a) Firstly, the claimants have claimed that the deceased

was earning Rs.22,200/- per month. The salary certificate

dated 05.01.2019 issued after the death of the deceased,

except that they have not produced bank statements or

any other documents to show that the deceased was

getting Rs.22,200/- per month as a salary working as

driver with respondent No.1. Therefore, the Tribunal has

rightly assessed the national income of the deceased as

Rs.10,000/- per month. He further contented that since

claimants have failed to prove the established income of

the deceased, the Tribunal has not rightly awarded future

prospects.

b) Secondly, on appreciation of oral and documentary

evidence and considering the age and avocation of the

deceased, the overall compensation awarded by the

Tribunal is just and reasonable. Hence, sought for

dismissal of the appeal.

NC: 2025:KHC-K:6035-DB

HC-KAR

8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties,

perused the judgment and award including the appeal

papers.

9. It is not in dispute Taranath died in road traffic

accident has occurred on 21.12.2018 due to rash and

negligent driving of driver of the bus bearing registration

No.KA-32/C-8408. Even though, claimants have claimed

that the deceased was getting salary of Rs.22,200/- per

month as a driver. The salary certificate dated 05.01.2019

is issued after the date of accident and they have

produced driving licence which clearly shows that

deceased was a driver by profession and also produced

driver badge at Ex-8. Considering the same, it is

appropriate to consider the income of the deceased at

Rs.13,000/- per month. To the aforesaid income, 40%

has to be added on account of future prospects in view of

the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the

Supreme Court in 'PRANAY SETHI' (supra). Thus, the

monthly income comes to Rs.18,200/-. Since there are

NC: 2025:KHC-K:6035-DB

HC-KAR

five dependents, it is appropriate to deduct 1/4th of the

income of the deceased towards personal expenses and

remaining amount has to be taken as his contribution to

the family. The deceased was aged about 28 years at the

time of the accident and multiplier applicable to his age

group is '17'. Thus, the claimants are entitled to

compensation of Rs.27,84,600/- (Rs.18,200*12*17*1/4)

on account of 'loss of dependency'.

10. In addition, the claimants are entitled to

compensation of Rs.15,000/- on account of 'loss of estate'

and compensation of Rs.15,000/- on account of 'funeral

expenses'.

11. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme

Court in the case of 'MAGMA GENERAL INSURANCE'

(supra), claimant No.1, wife of the deceased is entitled for

compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head of 'loss of

spousal consortium', claimant Nos.2 and 3, children of the

deceased are entitled for compensation of Rs.40,000/-

each under the head of 'loss of parental consortium' and

- 10 -

NC: 2025:KHC-K:6035-DB

HC-KAR

claimant Nos.4 and 5, parents of the deceased are entitled

for compensation of Rs.40,000/- each under the head of

'loss of filial consortium'.

12. Thus, the claimants are entitled to the following

compensation:

                Compensation under                Amount in
                  different Heads                   (Rs.)

               Loss of dependency                   27,84,600

               Funeral expenses                        15,000

               Loss of estate                          15,000

               Loss of spousal                         40,000
               consortium

               Loss of Parental                        80,000
               consortium

               Loss of Filial consortium               80,000

                                Total             30,14,600/-

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