Karnataka High Court
Nelamma vs Jagadeesh M R on 16 September, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:36738
MFA No. 4145 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4145 OF 2024(MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. NELAMMA,
W/O. DODDA ERANNA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
2. DODDA ERANNA,
S/O. LATE PALAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
3. ERAMMA,
D/O. DODDA ERANNA,
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
4. MALLIKARJUNA,
S/O. DODDA ERANNA,
Digitally signed by AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
AASEEFA PARVEEN
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ALL ARE R/O. RAYAPURA VILLAGE,
KARNATAKA MOLAKALMURU TALUK,
NOW R/O. MADAKARIPURA VILLAGE,
CHITRADURGA TALUK - 577 501.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JAGADEESH M. R.,
S/O. RAJANNA M. S.,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:36738
MFA No. 4145 of 2024
HC-KAR
AGE MAJOR,
OWNER OF LORRY
BEARING NO. KA -50/A-3175,
R/O. NO.8, 2ND CROSS
SOLADEVANAHALLI,
HESARGHATTA, MAIN ROAD,
ACHIT NAGAR POST,
BENGALURU - 560 090.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
1ST FLOOR, VIRUPASKHA KRUPA,
OPP KIMS MAIN ROAD,
R. B. ROAD, HUBLI - 580 020.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNA REDDY, N.A. ,ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1- VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 16.09.2025,
NOTICE IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.08.2023 PASSED IN
MVC NO.483/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT-V,
CHITRADURGA, 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:36738
MFA No. 4145 of 2024
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
At request of Sri.R.Shashidhara learned counsel for
the appellants and Sri.Mallikarjun Reddy.N.A who
represents Sri.Pradeep.B learned counsel on record for
respondent No.2, the matter is taken up for final hearing
and disposal.
2. The first appellant being the mother, the second
appellant being the father, the third appellant being the
sister and the fourth appellant being the brother of the
deceased Darshan (hereinafter be referred to as the
'deceased' for brevity) filed a petition claiming
compensation of ₹40,00,000/- in total on the ground that
the deceased died in a road traffic accident that occurred
in the year 2020. The Additional Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal-V, Chitradurga dealt with the case as MVC
No.483/2020 and finally passed an award on 28.08.2023,
granting a sum of ₹10,74,000/- as compensation.
Projecting that they are entitled to a higher sum, the
present appeal is filed.
NC: 2025:KHC:36738
HC-KAR
3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that
the deceased was aged around 19 years by the date of
accident. He was working as a labourer and was earning
₹20,000/- per month. The tribunal took the notional
income of the deceased as ₹14,500/- per month and the
appellants have no grievance in this regard. However, the
Tribunal failed to add future prospects. Learned counsel
states that as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
the case of National Insurance Company Limited vs.
Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680,
future prospects are required to be added. Learned
counsel further submits that the compensation that is
granted by the Tribunal towards the loss of estate and
funeral expenses is also on lower side. Learned counsel
further contends that the Tribunal failed to award any
compensation towards loss of filial consortium. Learned
counsel thereby seeks for enhancement in compensation.
NC: 2025:KHC:36738
HC-KAR
4. Sri.Mallikarjun Reddy.N.A who represents
respondent No.2 seeks the Court to dispose of the matter
on merits.
5. As rightly contended by learned counsel for the
appellants, the Tribunal for the reasons best known failed
to add the future prospects. Also the Tribunal did not
award any compensation towards loss of filial consortium.
Therefore, this Court considers desirable to revisit entire
case and to award justifiable sum as compensation.
6. Having taken the notional income of the
deceased as ₹14,500/- per month, on adding 40%
towards future prospects as per the decision of the Hon'ble
Apex Court in Pranay Sethi's case, the deceased being
aged about 19 years by the date of accident, deducting
50% towards personal and living expenses which the
deceased would have incurred for himself had he been
alive as the deceased died as bachelor and applying the
appropriate multiplier '18' the compensation which the
NC: 2025:KHC:36738
HC-KAR
appellants are entitled under the head 'loss of dependency'
is as under:
Amount
Description
In Rs.
Notional income 14,500-00
Annual Income (14,500X12) 1,74,000-00
On adding 40% towards future
2,43,600-00
prospects
On deducting 50% towards
1,21,800-00
personal and living expenses
Loss of dependency, on applying
21,92,400-00
appropriate multiplier '18'
7. Thus the appellants are entitled to a sum of
₹21,92,400/- towards loss of dependency. Together with
the said amount appellant Nos.1 and 2 being the parents
of the deceased are entitled to ₹44,000/- towards loss of
filial consortium. The appellants are also entitled to a sum
of ₹16,500/- towards funeral expenses and ₹16,500/-
towards loss of estate. Thus the total sum which the
appellants are entitled to is as under:
NC: 2025:KHC:36738
HC-KAR
Sl Compensation Amount
No. in Rs.
1 Loss of dependency 21,92,400-00
2 Loss of filial consortium 44,000-00
3 Funeral expenses 16,500-00
4 Loss of estate 16,500-00
Total 22,69,400-00
Thus the appellants are entitled to a sum of
₹22,69,400/- as compensation. Therefore, appeal is
disposed of with the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The compensation that is granted by the
Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V,
Chitradurga through orders in MVC
No.483/2020 dated 28.08.2023 is enhanced
from ₹10,74,000/- to ₹22,69,400/-.
(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
NC: 2025:KHC:36738
HC-KAR
delay of 206 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) Out of the enhanced sum, the first appellant is
entitled to 50%, the second appellant is entitled
to 40% and appellant Nos.3 and 4 are entitled
to 5% each.
(vi) On deposit, the appellants are permitted to
withdraw their respective shares.
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
DS
CT:TSM
