[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Shivanna vs The Manager on 16 February, 2026

                                            -1-
                                                        NC: 2026:KHC:9269
                                                  MFA No. 2677 of 2015


               HC-KAR




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                      DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026

                                       BEFORE
                          THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
               MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2677 OF 2015 (MV-D)
               BETWEEN:

               1.    SHIVANNA,
                     S/O VENKATESHAPPA @ VENKATAPPA,
                     AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,

               2.    THIMMAKKA,
                     W/O SHIVANNA,
                     AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,

               3.    S. BHAGYAMMA,
                     D/O SHIVANNA,
                     AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,

                     ALL ARE R/AT NO.30,
Digitally            BAGGANADU,
Signed by
REKHA R
                     HIRIYUR TALUK,
Location :           CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
High Court
of Karnataka
                                                            ...APPELLANTS
               (BY SRI. SATHISH B & LAW MENS CO., ADVOCATES)

               AND:

               1.    THE MANAGER,
                     ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
                     REGIONAL OFFICE,
                     NO.44/45, 4TH FLOOR,
                     LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX,
                            -2-
                                        NC: 2026:KHC:9269
                                    MFA No. 2677 of 2015


HC-KAR




     RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS,
     BANGALORE - 560 025.

2.   LOKESH S.N.,
     S/O NINGANNA,
     R/AT NO.93/1, 5TH CROSS,
     9TH MAIN ROAD,
     J.C. NAGAR,
     BANGALORE - 86.

                                          ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. C.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1,
     R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)


      THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:02.01.2015
PASSED IN MVC NO.3848/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE XXIII
ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, & XXI ACMM, MACT,
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

      THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF


                    ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is by the claimants seeking enhancement

of compensation so also calling in question the absolute

exoneration of the Insurance Company, arising out of the

NC: 2026:KHC:9269

HC-KAR

Judgment and Award dated 02.01.2015 in

M.V.C.No.3848/2013 passed by the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, at Bengaluru (for short

'the Tribunal').

2. The parties are referred to as per their rankings

before the Tribunal.

3. In an accident that occurred on 31.05.2013,

son of claimant Nos.1 and 2 and brother of claimant No.3

by name Sri.Ranganatha.S, suffered fatal injuries and

succumbed. The Tribunal upon considering the entire

material placed on record, taking the income at the rate of

Rs.6,000/- per month, adding 10% towards future

prospectus and deducting 50% towards personal expenses

awarded total compensation of Rs.6,19,114/- (Rupees Six

Lakh Nineteen Thousand One Hundred and Fourteen only)

along with interest at 6% per annum.

4. The Tribunal upon consideration of evidence led

by the Insurer comes to a conclusion that the driver was

NC: 2026:KHC:9269

HC-KAR

not possessing valid and effective driving license at the

time of accident, exonerated the Insurance Company from

paying the compensation and made respondent No.2 -

owner of the vehicle to pay the entire compensation. It is

this award passed by the Tribunal is called in question by

the claimants on two grounds.

5. Firstly, the deceased was a third party and even

in the absence of driving license, in view of settled position

of law, when there is a valid insurance policy existing as

on the date of the accident, the Insurer be made liable to

pay the compensation primarily with liberty to recover the

same from the owner of the vehicle. Secondly, the year of

accident was 2013 and as per the Chart prepared by the

Karnataka State Legal Services Authority for settlement of

claims before the Lok-Adalat, a sum of Rs.8,000/- per

month is fixed for the year 2013 and the same must have

been considered by the Tribunal while calculating the loss

of dependency. Further, in view of settled position of law,

40% must have been added towards future prospectus

NC: 2026:KHC:9269

HC-KAR

instead of 10% as taken by the Tribunal. It is further

submitted that the Tribunal has not awarded appropriate

compensation under the Conventional Heads, so also 10%

escalation on the same. Accordingly, learned counsel for

appellant sought to allow the appeal and to enhance the

compensation and the Insurer to pay the compensation

primarily with liberty to recover from the owner of the

offending vehicle.

6. Refuting the submissions of learned counsel

appearing for the appellants, Sri.C.R.Ravishankar., learned

counsel appearing for the Insurance Company with all

vehemence submits that the Tribunal in the absence of

any proof of income, considered the monthly income at

Rs.6,000/- per month, however, he is not in dispute with

the settled position of law that 40% is to be added

towards future prospectus and 10% towards escalation on

the compensation awarded under the conventional heads.

But he submits that in view of law laid down by the

Hon'ble Apex Court so far as Filial Compensation is

NC: 2026:KHC:9269

HC-KAR

concerned, only the father and mother are entitled and not

the brothers and sisters.

7. Having heard the submissions, the following

questions would arise for consideration:

1) Whether the Tribunal is right in absolutely

exonerating the Insurer from paying

compensation?

2) Whether the Claimants have made out

any case for enhancement?

8. My answer to the above points for consideration

are as under:

Point No.1 : Partly in the affirmative.

Point No.2 : Partly in the affirmative, for the

following:

REASONS

9. POINT NO.1: Admittedly, the deceased was a

third party. As per the police records, deceased Ranganath

was proceeding towards his home on Brundavan factory

NC: 2026:KHC:9269

HC-KAR

road, at that time, the rider of the motorcycle came in a

rash and negligent manner and caused the accident,

resulting in the death of the deceased. In these

circumstances, in view of settled position of law in PAPPU

DEO YADAV VS. NARESH KUMAR AND OTHERS1, the

Insurer is primarily made liable to pay the compensation

with liberty to recover the same. Accordingly, point No.1 is

answered partly in the affirmative.

10. POINT No.2: So far as enhancement of

compensation is concerned, admittedly the accident had

occurred in the year 2013. As per the Chart stated supra,

the income is fixed at the rate of Rs.8,000/- per month.

The Tribunal has taken Rs.6,000/- per month, accordingly

the same requires enhancement. So far as future

prospectus is concerned, the Tribunal has considered at

10%, which is erroneous and against the settled position

of law. The learned counsel for the Insurer fairly submits

that 40% ought to have been considered in view of settled

AIR Online 2018 SC 1582

NC: 2026:KHC:9269

HC-KAR

position of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. vs. PRANAY SETHI2.

In view of higher income as well as future prospectus and

the Filial Consortium, the compensation requires

reassessment and re-determination. Accordingly, this

Court proceeds to reassess the compensation which reads

as under:

Compensation Sl. awarded by By this Court Heads No. the Tribunal In Rs.

In Rs.

1. Loss of dependency 5,04,000-00 12,09,600-00 (8,000+40%x12x18x50%)

2. Loss of love and 25,000-00 80,000-00 affection [Rs.40,000 x 2]

3. Future Prospectus 50,400-00 -

4. Funeral expenses 15,000-00 15,000-00

5. Re-imbursement of 9,714-00 9,714-00 Medical expenses

6. Transportation of 5,000-00 5,000-00 dead body

7. Loss of estate 10,000-00 15,000-00

8. 20% escalation (for - 22,000-00 two terms of three completed years on conventional heads) TOTAL 6,19,114-00 13,56,314-00

11. Accordingly, the claimants are entitled for re-

assessed compensation of Rs.13,56,314/- which shall

carry interest at the rate of 6% from the rate of petition

2017 (16) SCC 680

NC: 2026:KHC:9269

HC-KAR

till realization. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the

following:

ORDER

(i) The appeal is allowed in part.

(ii) The Judgment and Award dated 02.01.2015

in M.V.C.No.3848/2013 passed by the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small

Causes, at Bengaluru is modified and the

compensation is reassessed.

(iii) The claimants are entitled for re-assessed

compensation of Rs.13,56,314/- along with

interest at the rate of 6% per annum from

the date of petition till realization.

(iv) Respondent No.1 - Insurer is primarily made

liable to pay the entire re-assessed

compensation with interest stated supra with

a liberty to recover the same from the owner

of the vehicle.

- 10 -

NC: 2026:KHC:9269

HC-KAR

(v) Respondent No.1 - Insurer shall deposit the

entire re-assessed compensation along with

interest stated supra within six weeks from

the date of receipt of certified copy of this

order.

(vi) Upon deposit, the apportionment and

disbursement is as per the order passed by

the Tribunal.

(vii) The trial Court record shall be transmitted