[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Smt.Mahadevi vs The Divisional Controller on 2 April, 2026
Author: Ravi V.Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5002
MFA No. 103025 of 2016
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103025 OF 2016 (MV)
BETWEEN:
1. SMT.MAHADEVI
W/O MAHADEVA HONNAMANI @ SAMAGAR,
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE,
2. SRI HANAMANT
S/O MAHADEVA HONNAMANI @ SAMAGAR,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: EDUCATION,
3. SRI BASAVARAJ
S/O MAHADEVA HONNAMANI @ SAMAGAR,
AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: EDUCATION,
ALL ARE R/O: KULLAHALLI, MAHALINGPUR,
TQ: MUDHOL, DIST: BAGALKOT-587312.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI PRASHANT S. KADADEVAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
N.W.K.R.T.C., NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT-587101.
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
2. THE DEPOT MANAGER,
CHANDRASHEKAR KATTIMANI
LAXMAN Location: High
KATTIMANI Court of Karnataka
Dharwad Bench
Date: 2026.04.04
06:58:12 +0100
N.W.K.R.T.C., JAMKHANDI,
TQ: JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT-587301.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MK SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
12.02.2015, PASSED IN MVC.NO.624/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL NO.VI AT JAMKHANDI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION & ETC.
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5002
MFA No. 103025 of 2016
HC-KAR
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Challenging judgment and award dated 12.02.2015 passed
by Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT no.VI, Jamkhandi1 in
MVC no.624/2012, this appeal is filed.
2. Sri Prashant S. Kadadevar, learned counsel for
appellants submitted that appeal was by claimants for
enhancement of compensation. It was submitted at 02.45 p.m.,
on 14.07.2012 when Mahadeva was proceeding on motorcycle
no.KA-23/Q-9890 on Jamakhandi-Banahatti road, driver of
NWKRTC Bus no.KA-29/F-900 drove it in rash and negligent
manner and dashed against motorcycle causing accident. In said
accident, Mahadeva sustained grievous injuries and succumbed
to same on spot. Alleging loss of dependency on account of his
sudden death, his wife and children filed claim petition against
NWKRTC under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
For short, 'Tribunal'
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5002
HC-KAR
3. On contest wherein claim petition was opposed on
ground of negligence of rider of motorcycle, rider not having
valid and effective driving license etc., Tribunal framed issues
and recorded evidence. Claimant no.1 deposed as PW1 and got
marked Exs.P1 to P6. NWKRTC examined its driver as RW1 and
did not mark any documents.
4. On consideration, Tribunal held accident occurred due
to rash and negligent driving of Bus by its driver and claimants
were entitled for compensation of Rs.8,80,000/- with interest at
6% per annum. Dissatisfied with quantum appeal is filed.
5. As on date of accident, deceased was 46 years of
age, working as cobbler and earning Rs.15,000/- per month.
However, Tribunal considered monthly income at Rs.7,500/- and
awarded inadequate compensation without adding future
prospects. It was submitted compensation awarded under
conventional heads was not commensurate and sought for
awarding same. On said limited grounds sought enhancement.
6. Sri MK Soudagar, learned counsel for insurer opposed
appeal. It was submitted, Tribunal had assessed compensation
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5002
HC-KAR
by taking higher notional income of Rs.7,500/- as against
Rs.6,500/- adopted for year 2012 and same would offset scope
for enhancement.
7. Heard learned counsel for parties, perused impugned
judgment and award.
8. From above, only point that would arise for
consideration is:
"Whether claimants are entitled for
enhancement of compensation as prayed?"
9. Though claimants stated that deceased was 46 years
of age and earning Rs.15,000/- per month working as cobbler,
same was not justified. In absence, Tribunal was justified in
assessing it notionally. But, notional income for 2012 is
Rs.6,500/-. Therefore, Tribunal was not justified in taking it at
Rs.7,500/-. However, claimants would be justified in urging
Tribunal erred in not adding future prospects to monthly income.
Since deceased was 46 years of age and self-employed, future
prospects at 25% is required to be added. As he was married,
1/3rd has to be deducted towards personal expenses and
multiplier applicable would be '13'.
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5002
HC-KAR
10. Thus, compensation towards loss of dependency
would be Rs.8,45,052/- [(6,500+25%=8125)-
(1/3rd)=5417x12x13].
11. Claimants would also be entitled for Rs.40,000/- each
towards filial consortium and parental consortium i.e., to
Rs.1,20,000/-, in addition to Rs.15,000/- towards loss of
estate and Rs.15,000/- towards funeral expenses. Since more
than 6 years have been lapsed, they would also be entitled for
addition of 20% towards escalation of compensation under
conventional heads i.e., Rs.30,000/-.
12. Thus, total compensation is Rs.10,25,052/-.
13. Point for consideration is answered partly in
affirmative as well. Consequently, following:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) Claimants are held entitled for
enhanced compensation of
Rs.10,25,052/- as against
NC: 2026:KHC-D:5002
HC-KAR
Rs.8,80,000/- awarded by Tribunal with
interest at 6% per annum from date of
claim petition till deposit excluding
period of 495 days being delay in filing
appeal.
(iii) NWKRTC is directed to deposit
enhanced compensation with interest
within eight (8) weeks.
(iv) On deposit, Tribunal is directed to
apportion enhanced compensation
proportionately and release it in favour
of claimants.
Sd/-
(RAVI V.HOSMANI)
JUDGE
SMM, CT:VP
LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 16
