Karnataka High Court
Sri Nagaraj K vs Ashok Leyland Limited on 10 September, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:35694
MFA No. 4555 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4555 OF 2024(MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI NAGARAJ K.,
S/O KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS,
2. KAUSHIK N. GOWDA,
S/O NAGARAJ K.,
AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS,
3. KUM. SADHANA,
D/O. NAGARAJ K.,
AGED ABOUT 09 YEARS
SINCE APPELLANT NOS. 2 AND 3 ARE
Digitally signed MINORS REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN
by AASEEFA AND APPELLANT NO.1 I.E., NAGARAJ K.,
PARVEEN
Location: HIGH ALL ARE RESIDING AT
COURT OF BHAKTHARAHALLI, NADAVATHI POST,
KARNATAKA HOSAKOTE, BENGALURU - 560067
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. H.R. SATHYAPAL HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. ASHOK LEYLAND LIMITED,
BY ITS MANAGER,
NEW CORPORATE OFFICE NO 01,
SARDAR PATEL ROAD, GUINDY,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:35694
MFA No. 4555 of 2024
HC-KAR
CHENANI TAMILNADU.
2. IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BY ITS MANAGER,
MOTOR CLAIMS HUB,
NO 141, 3RD MAIN, SRI SHANTHI TOWERS,
5TH FLOOR, EAST TO NGEF LAYOUT
KASTURINAGAR,
BENGALURU - 560 043.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN REDDY N.A., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1-SERVED)
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 31.10.2023 PASSED IN
MVC NO.3357/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL
SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND XXIV ACMM, MAYO HALL UNIT,
BENGALURU SCCH-20, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:35694
MFA No. 4555 of 2024
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
At request of Sri.Sathyapal Hegde, who represents
Sri.Gurudev Prasad.K.T learned counsel on record for the
appellants, as well as Sri.Mallikarjun Reddy.N.A, who
represents Sri.B.Pradeep learned counsel on record for
respondent No.2, the matter is taken up for final hearing and
disposal.
2. Challenge in this appeal is the order that is
rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore in
MVC No.3357/2022 dated 31.10.2023. This is a claimants'
appeal.
3. Appellant No.1 being the husband and appellant
Nos.2 and 3 being the minor children of the deceased Aruna,
who died in a road traffic accident that occurred in the year
2022, filed a petition claiming compensation of ₹50,00,000/- in
total. The Tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum
of ₹19,41,936/- as compensation. Projecting that the sum thus
granted is grossly low, the present appeal is filed.
NC: 2025:KHC:35694
HC-KAR
4. Arguing on merits of the matter, learned counsel for
the appellants submits that the appellants are only aggrieved
by the income assessed by the Tribunal in respect of deceased
Aruna. Learned counsel states that the deceased Aruna was
earning ₹25,000/- per month as a tailor besides attending
household duties. However, the Tribunal took the national
income as ₹10,000/- per month. Learned counsel submits that
the accident occurred in the year 2022 and for the relevant
period, the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking
the notional income as ₹15,500/- per month for settlement of
claims and atleast said figure should have been adopted by the
Tribunal.
5. Sri.Mallikarjun Reddy.N.A who represents
respondent No.2, though states that the compensation granted
by the Tribunal is valid in all aspects, however, did not raise
any serious objection, for taking the notional income as
₹15,500/- per month as sought by learned counsel for the
appellants. Also, this Court is of the view that the notional
income as sought for is required to be taken as ₹15,500/- per
month.
NC: 2025:KHC:35694
HC-KAR
6. Thus taking the notional income as ₹15,500/- per
month and without disturbing the other parameters that is
adding 40% towards future prospects, deducting 1/3rd of the
earnings, which the deceased Aruna would have incurred for
herself had she been alive and applying appropriate multiplier
'16', the compensation which the appellants are entitled to
under the head of loss of dependency is as under:
Amount
Description
In Rs.
Notional monthly income 15,500-00
Annual Income (15,500X12) 1,86,000-00
On adding 40% towards future
2,60,400-00
prospects
On deducting 1/3rd towards
1,73,600-00
personal and living expenses
Loss of dependency, on applying
27,77,600-00
appropriate multiplier '16'
7. Thus the appellants are entitled to a sum of
₹27,77,600/- towards loss of dependency. However, the
Tribunal awarded a sum of ₹17,91,936/- only. Thus, the sum
which the appellants are entitled to in addition to the sum that
is awarded by the Tribunal under the head 'loss of dependency'
is ₹9,85,664/- (₹27,77,600/- - ₹17,91,936/-). Therefore the
appeal is disposed of with the following:
NC: 2025:KHC:35694
HC-KAR
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore through orders
in MVC No.3357/2022 dated 31.10.2023 is
enhanced by ₹9,85,664/-.
(iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of
6% per annum from the date of petition till the date
of deposit except for the period of delay of 151 days
as per orders in I.A.No.1/2024.
(iv) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the
enhanced sum within a period of eight weeks from
the date of receipt of certified copy of this
judgment.
(v) The apportionment made by the Tribunal applies to
enhanced sum as well.
(vi) On deposit, the first appellant is permitted to
withdraw his share.
(vii) The amount that falls to the share of appellant
Nos.2 and 3 shall be kept in fixed deposit in any
Nationalised Bank till they attain the age of
majority.
NC: 2025:KHC:35694
HC-KAR
(viii) On their attaining the age of majority, they are
entitled to withdraw their respective shares.
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
DS
CT:TSM
