Karnataka High Court
The Manager vs Smt. Vasantha on 8 September, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:35070-DB
MFA No. 5790 of 2019
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5790 OF 2019 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGER
MANGALORE DEPOT,
MANGALORE
REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER
HASSAN DEPOT,
KSRTC, HASSAN-573 201.
BOTH ARE REPRESENTED BY
THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER,
Digitally signed KSRTC CENTRAL OFFICES,
by VASANTHA K.H. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 027.
KUMARY B K ...APPELLANT
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA (BY SRI. GOWTHAMDEV C.ULLAL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. VASANTHA
W/O LATE H.D.RAGHU,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
2. H.R.CHAITANYA @ CHETHANA
D/O H.D.RAGHU,
AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:35070-DB
MFA No. 5790 of 2019
HC-KAR
3. H.R.LOHITH
D/O H.D.RAGHU,
AGED ABOUT 9 YEARS,
4. RATHNAMMA
W/O LATE DEVARAJU @ DEVARAJEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS,
SINCE THE APPELLANT NOS. 2 AND 3 ARE MINORS,
REPRESENTED BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN
MOTHER VASANTHA I.E. APPELLANT NO.1,
ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF HOSAGUTTA VILLAGE,
SHANIVARASHANTHE HOBLI,
SOMAVARAPETE TALUK-571 236.
PRESENTLY RESIDENTS OF
C/O CHANDRASHEKAR, CHANNAPATNA,
BOMMANAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE ROAD,
HASSAN-573 201.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. CHETAN B., ADVOCATE FOR R1 - R4;
R2 & R3 MINOR REPRESENTED BY R1)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.03.2019, PASSED IN MVC
NO.1250/2014, ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT AND JMFC., HASSAN,
AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.31,81,750/- WITH
INTEREST 8% P.A., FROM THE DATE PETITION TILL
REALIZATION.
THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:35070-DB
MFA No. 5790 of 2019
HC-KAR
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)
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
counsel for the respondents.
2. The appellant - Corporation has filed this appeal
challenging the judgment and award dated 19.03.2019
passed by the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge,
MACT, Hassan, whereby the Tribunal awarded total
compensation of Rs.31,81,750/- with interest at the rate
of 8% per annum from the date of petition till the date of
its realization.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred
to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.
4. Brief facts of the case are that, on 26.06.2014, the
deceased Sri Raghu H.D met with an accident while he
was riding his motor bike bearing Reg.No.KA-12-K-5427
NC: 2025:KHC:35070-DB
HC-KAR
near Jinneahalli around 12.30 pm. At that time, the said
KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-19-F-2414 is allegedly
dashed against the deceased H.D.Raghu resulting in fatal
injuries thereafter he succumbed to the injuries and died
at the spot.
5. Sri Gowthamdev C. Ullal, learned counsel for the
appellant - Corporation contended that the Tribunal has
awarded a total compensation of Rs.31,81,750/- with
interest at 8% p.a. which is an excessive and exorbitant
one.
6. Further, the Tribunal considered the monthly income
of the deceased at Rs.11,150/-, by deducting 1/4th
towards his personal expenses and by applying multiplier
of '15', awarded a huge compensation.
7. Further, the deceased was an Ex-Army; the Tribunal
ought to have considered the notional income for the
accident of the year 2014.
NC: 2025:KHC:35070-DB
HC-KAR
8. Thirdly, the Tribunal has awarded an excessive
interest at the rate of 8% on the total compensation and
the same may be reduced to 6%. Thus, he prays to allow
the appeal.
9. Per contra, Sri Chethan.B, learned counsel for the
respondents-claimants supports the impugned judgment
and award of the Tribunal and submits that, considering
the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal
has granted just and reasonable compensation under each
head which does not call for any interference by the hands
of this Court. Thus, he prays to dismiss the appeal.
10. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant-
Corporation and learned counsel for the respondents-
claimants, the point that would arise for our consideration
in the appeal is:
Whether the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal is just and
reasonable or does it call for
enhancement or reduction?
NC: 2025:KHC:35070-DB
HC-KAR
11. In the instant appeal, the appellant - Corporation has
not disputed the accident in question, the cause of death
of the deceased and the liability to pay compensation to
the claimants.
12. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is
considered, the Tribunal has considered the income of the
deceased at Rs.11,150/- per month based on the oral and
documentary evidence produced at Ex.P-9, the Pension
statement cum Bank statement.
13. As on the date of the accident, the deceased was
aged about 39 years old and he was an Ex-Army man and
was drawing pension amount of Rs.11,150/- per month.
Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the monthly
income of the deceased at Rs.11,150/-. Hence, no
interference is called for in that regard.
14. Insofar as the conventional heads are concerned, the
Tribunal has granted only Rs.40,000/- towards 'loss of
consortium', a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards 'loss of estate'
NC: 2025:KHC:35070-DB
HC-KAR
and Rs.15,000/- towards 'funeral expenses', hence, no
interference is called for in that regard.
15. Insofar as the interest is concerned, the Tribunal
without any material evidence available on record, has
granted interest at 8% per annum which is an excessive
and exorbitant one. Hence, we are reducing the interest
from 8% to 6% in terms of Section 34 of the Civil
Procedure Code (CPC), 1908.
16. In the result, we pass the following:
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed-in-part.
ii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is
hereby confirmed however the interest
imposed/granted by the Tribunal at 8% is reduced to
6% per annum.
iii. The claimants-respondents are entitled for total
compensation with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.
iv. The appellant-Corporation is directed to deposit the
entire compensation amount together with accrued
interest before the Tribunal within a period of six
NC: 2025:KHC:35070-DB
HC-KAR
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment.
v. The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the
Tribunal for disbursement.
vi. Draw modified award accordingly.
vii. No order as to costs.
Registry is directed to send a copy of this judgment
to the Tribunal along with its record, forthwith.
In view of the disposal of the appeal, all pending
applications, if any, shall stand disposed off, as they do
not survive for any consideration.
SD/-
(D K SINGH)
JUDGE
SD/-
(VENKATESH NAIK T)
JUDGE
DHA
