Karnataka High Court
Ganapathi And Ors vs Santosh And Anr on 22 September, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
MFA No. 202156 of 2024
C/W MFA No. 200680 of 2024
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 202156 OF 2024 (MV-D)
C/W
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200680 OF 2024
IN M.F.A.NO.202156/2024
BETWEEN:
1. GANAPATHI
S/O LATE DHARMANNA SONATE,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
2. KUM KALAVATHI
D/O GANAPATHI SONATE,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
Digitally signed OCC: STUDENT,
by
KHAJAAMEEN
MALAGHAN 3. KUM. PRIYANKA
Location: HIGH D/O LATE GANAPATHI SONATE,
COURT OF AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS (MINOR),
KARNATAKA OCC: STUDENT,
UNDER GUARDIAN REPRESENTED THOUGH
HER NATURAL FATHER BY NAME
GANAPATHI
S/O LATE DHARMANNA SONATE,
4. SHINDU BAI
W/O LATE DHARMANNA SONATE,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
MFA No. 202156 of 2024
C/W MFA No. 200680 of 2024
HC-KAR
ALL ARE R/AT: TADOLA VILLAGE,
TQ: BASAVAKALYAN AND
DISTRICT BIDAR - 585 401.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. VEERANI V.NANDI, AND
KUMARI VAISHNAVI CHAND, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. SANTOSH
S/O SHAMRAO VALSANGE,
AGED ABOUT : MAJOR,
OCC: BUSINESS,
(OWNER OF THE SWIFT ADI CAR)
R/O: AMBESANGAVE,
TQ: BHALKI,
DISTRICT : BIDAR - 585 401.
2. THE MANAGER,
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
LIMITED, POLICY ISSUING OFFICE :
CICI LOMBARD HOUSE, 414,
VEER SAVARKAR MARGE,
NEAR SIDDI VINAYAK TEMPLE,
PRABHADEVI MUMBAI - 400 025.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MANJUNATH MALLAYYA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN M.V.C.NO.567/2016
ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT,
AT BASAVAKALYAN AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 09.02.2022 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
MFA No. 202156 of 2024
C/W MFA No. 200680 of 2024
HC-KAR
ADDL. MACT AT BASAVAKALAYN BY ALLOWING THE PRESENT
APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.
IN M.F.A.NO.200680/2024
BETWEEN:
1. SHINDU BAI
W/O LATE DHARMANNA SONATE,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
2. GANAPATHI
S/O LATE DHARMANNA SONATE,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
3. KUM KALAVATHI
D/O GANAPATHI SONATE,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
OCC: STUDENT,
4. KUM. PRIYANKA
D/O LATE GANAPATHI SONATE,
AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS (MINOR),
OCC: STUDENT,
UNDER GUARDIAN REPRESENTED THOUGH
HER NATURAL FATHER BY NAME
GANAPATHI
S/O LATE DHARMANNA SONATE,
ALL ARE R/AT: TADOLA VILLAGE,
TQ: BASAVAKALYAN AND
DISTRICT BIDAR - 585 401.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SMT. VEERANI V.NANDI, AND
KUMARI VAISHNAVI CHAND, ADVOCATES)
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
MFA No. 202156 of 2024
C/W MFA No. 200680 of 2024
HC-KAR
AND:
1. SANTOSH
S/O SHAMRAO VALSANGE,
AGED ABOUT : MAJOR,
OCC: BUSINESS,
(OWNER OF THE SWIFT ADI CAR)
R/O: AMBESANGAVE,
TQ: BHALKI,
DISTRICT : BIDAR - 585 401.
2. THE MANAGER,
ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
LIMITED, POLICY ISSUING OFFICE :
CICI LOMBARD HOUSE, 414,
VEER SAVARKAR MARGE,
NEAR SIDDI VINAYAK TEMPLE,
PRABHADEVI MUMBAI - 400 025.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MANJUNATH MALLAYYA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
09.02.2022 IN M.V.C.NO.569/2016 PASSED BY THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. MACT AT BASAVAKALAYN BY
ALLOWING THE PRESENT APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC.
THESE APPEAL'S, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR
AMARANNAVAR
-5-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
MFA No. 202156 of 2024
C/W MFA No. 200680 of 2024
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
MFA No.202156/2024 is filed by claimants seeking
enhancement of compensation as awarded in the
judgment and award dated 09.02.2022 passed in MVC
No.567/2016 by Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT,
Basavakalyan.
2. MFA No.200680/2024 is filed by claimants
seeking enhancement of compensation as awarded in the
judgment and award dated 09.02.2022 passed in MVC
No.569/2016 by Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT,
Basavakalyan.
3. Facts leading to file claim petitions are as
under;
That on 20.12.2015 at about 4.00 p.m., deceased -
Dharmanna was riding TVS XL motor cycle bearing No.
KA-56 E-8560 and child -Laxuman and Channvva were
pillion riders. When they reached near Dhumansur village,
at that time Maruti Swift ZDI Car bearing No. KA-28 NTO-
22285 came from opposite side and he was driving the car
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
in rash and negligent manner and lost control and dashed
to the motor cycle. As a result of accident, Laxuman and
Chanavva died and Dharmanna sustained severe injuries
and he has also died on the spot. Legal representatives of
deceased have filed claim petitions. The Tribunal has
assessed compensation and passed award. Claimants
have filed these appeals seeking enhancement of
compensation.
4. Learned counsel for appellants in MFA
No.202156/2024 would contend that Laxuman who died in
the accident was aged 10 years as on the date of accident.
As per judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Thangavel and Others Vs The Managing Director,
tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited1, the
monthly income of the child has to be taken at Rs.5,000/-
and multiplier to be applied at 16 based on the father's
age and age of the father was 32 years. She further
contended that claimants being father, two sisters and
grand mother are entitled to consortium and the Tribunal
In Civil Appeal No.3595/2024 decided on 08.08.2025.
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
has erred in not awarding consortium and awarding only
loss of love and affection at Rs.15,000/-. With these, she
prayed to allow the appeal.
5. Learned counsel for appellants in MFA
No.200680/2024 would contend that the deceased was
aged 50 years and the Tribunal has rightly taken income
at Rs.9,000/- and rightly applied multiplier 13. She
further contended that the Tribunal has not awarded
future prospectus which is required to be awarded at 10%.
Claimants are four in number and they are dependants of
the deceased and therefore, deductions to be taken at
1/4th as against 1/3rd taken by the tribunal. The tribunal
has not awarded consortium to all claimants. She further
contended that the Tribunal has erred in awarding interest
from the date of judgment in both claim petitions and
prays to award interest from the date of petition. With
these she prayed to allow the appeal.
6. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would
contend that the Tribunal considering the judgment of
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kishan Gopal and
another Vs Lala and Others2 has rightly awarded
compensation for loss of dependency in the case of death
of Laxuman who was aged 10 years. He further
contended that claimants being sisters and grand mother
are not entitled consortium. He further contended that in
the case of death of Dharmanna, the Tribunal has erred in
taking the income at Rs.9,000/- and it is without any basis
and as per chart prepared by the legal Services Authority
for settlement of disputes in Lok -Aadalath, the notional
income is fixed for the year 2015 is Rs.8,000/-. The
compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads
are just and proper.
7. Having heard learned counsels, this Court has
perused impugned judgments and other materials placed
on record.
MFA No.202156/2024 (MVC No.567/2016)
8. The deceased-Laxuman was aged 10 years as
on the date of accident. Claimant No.1 is father, claimant
Reported in (2014) 1 SCC
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
Nos.2 and 3 are sisters and claimant No.4 is grand mother
of the deceased Laxuman.
9. In the case Kishan Gopal (supra), the Hon'ble
Apex Court has taken notional income of the deceased at
Rs.30,000/-. The said case came to be decided in the year
2014 and the claim petition pertains to the year 1993. In
the case on hand, the accident has taken place in the year
2015. There is gap of 22 years in between the accident in
the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) and the present case.
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Thangavel (supra) has held as under:-
"5. There is no straight jacket formula
as to the income to be adopted in the case
of children when they suffer injuries or
succumb to death, in a motor vehicle
accident. In fact, the Tribunal had
considered a Division Bench decision which
adopted the income of Rs.5,000/- per
month for a 9-year old. The High Court
does not give any reasoning to deviate
from the said monthly income adopted by
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
a Division Bench and merely adopts the
income as per Schedule II. Schedule II is
applied in cases where the claim is made
under Section 163A of the Act, which
proceeds on a 'no fault liability'. In the
present case a claim under Section 166 of
the Act was preferred and there was
negligence found on the driver of the
offending vehicle.
6. We are of the opinion that the
monthly income of Rs.5,000/- as adopted
for the child by the Tribunal is perfectly in
order. There is no question of any
deduction for personal expenses and hence
even if the multiplier adopted is 15,
considering the mother's age of 36, the
total compensation for loss of dependency
would be Rs.7,50,000/-, Rs.30,000 more
than that awarded by the Tribunal. Insofar
as the loss of love and affection is
concerned, the Constitution Bench in
Pranay Sethi [(2017) 16 SCC 680)]
permits only Rs.40,000/- each and funeral
expenses as rightly reduced by the High
Court has to be Rs.15,000/. We find no
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
rationale for the High Court to have
deleted the transportation expenses and
loss of dress, ornaments and cycle. As
rightly awarded by the High Court, loss of
estate has to be compensated with
Rs.15,000/-. Hence, even if just
compensation of Rs.80,000 is fixed as loss
of filial consortium as applicable to both
the parents and the funeral expenses is
reduced to Rs.15,000/-, the total
compensation would be Rs.8,70,000/-."
11. In the said case, Hon'ble Apex Court has taken
monthly income of child at Rs.5,000/- and applied
multiplier 15 considering the mother's age of 36 years. In
the case on hand, the mother is not claimant. Claimant
No.1 is father and he is aged 32 years and considering the
same, multiplier applicable is 16. 1/3rd income has to be
deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased -
child. In view of the above, loss of dependency to be
taken as under;
Rs.5000/- x 12 x 16 x 2/3 = Rs.6,40,000/-
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
12. The tribunal has only awarded funeral expenses
in sum of Rs.10,000/-. Claimants are entitled to funeral
expenses in sum of Rs.15,000/- and loss of estate in sum
of Rs.15,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.15,000/- towards love and affection. Claimant No.1
being father of the deceased -child is entitled to filial
consortium of Rs.40,000/-. Claimant Nos.2 and 3 are two
minor sisters of the deceased -Laxuman. The said two
sisters have lost love and affection, companionship and
solatium of their brother deceased-Laxuman. Therefore,
claimant Nos.2 and 3 are also entitled to consortium of
Rs.40,000/- each. Claimant No.4 being grand mother of
the deceased -child who has lost love and affection,
companionship and solatium due to the death of her grand
child. Therefore, she is also entitled to consortium
Rs.40,000/-. In view of the above, claimants are entitled
to total compensation as under;
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
Sl.No. Heads Compensation
in
Rs.
1 Loss of dependency 6,40,000/-
2 Consortium 1,60,000/-
3 Funeral Expenses 15,000/-
4 Loss of estate 15,000/-
Total 8,30,000/-
13. In view of the above, claimants are entitled total
compensation of Rs.8,30,000/- against Rs.5,25,000/- as
awarded by the Tribunal.
MFA No.200680/2024 (MVC No.569/2016)
14. The deceased -Dharmanna was aged 50 years
as on the date of accident which was took place in the
year 2015. Claimants are wife, son and two minor
daughters. The tribunal has taken income of the deceased
at Rs.9,000/- per month. There is no basis to the Tribunal
to take income of Rs.9,000/-. As per chart prepared by the
Legal Services Authority for settlement of disputes in Lok-
Aadalath, the notional income for the year 2015 is
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
Rs.8,000/-. Claimants are entitled to future prospectus at
10% as per National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs Pranay
sheti and Ors3. Considering the age of the deceased,
multiplier applicable is 13. As dependants are four in
number, deduction towards personal expenses is 1/4th. In
view of the above, loss of dependency is as under;
Rs.8,000/- + 10% = Rs.8,800/- x 12 x 13 x 3/4
=Rs.10,29,600/-
15. Claimants being wife and three children are
entitled to consortium in sum of Rs,40,000/- each i.e.,
Rs.1,60,000/- as against Rs.40,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal. The tribunal has rightly awarded funeral
expenses in sum of Rs.15,000/- and loss of estate in sum
of Rs.15,000/. In view of the above, claimants are
entitled to total compensation as under;
Reported in AIR 2017 SUPREME COURT 5157
- 15 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
Sl.No. Heads Compensation
in
Rs.
1 Loss of dependency 10,29,600/-
2 Consortium 1,60,000/-
3 Funeral Expenses 15,000/-
4 Loss of estate 15,000/-
Total 12,19,600/-
16. In view of the above, claimants are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.12,19,600/- against Rs.10,06,000/- as
awarded by the Tribunal.
17. Claimants (in both cases) are entitled interest from
the date of petition till its realization. The tribunal has erred in
awarding interest from the date of judgment. Claimants are
entitled to interest at rate of 6% per annum from the date of
petition till its realization.
18. In view of the above, the following
ORDER
i) Both appeals are allowed in part.
ii) Claimants in MVC No.567/2016 are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.8,30,000/- as against Rs.5,25,000/-
- 16 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5711
HC-KAR
as awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of
6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.
iii) Claimants in MFA No.202156/2024 (MVC No.567/2016)
are not entitled to interest for the delay period of 585
days in filing appeal as per order dated 30.01.2025.
iv) Claimants in MFA No.200680/2024 (MVC No.569/2016)
are entitled to total compensation of Rs.12,19,600/- as
against Rs.10,06,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal with
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of
petition till realization.
v) Claimants in MVC No.569/2016 are not entitled to
interest for the delay period of 585 days in filing appeal
as per order dated 22.01.2025.
vi) The order of the Tribunal regarding share of award
amount and order of deposit is remained unaltered.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
DSP
