[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Karnataka High Court
Devaji @ Devaram S/O Limbu Chavan And Ors vs Laxman Rathod S/O Premsing And Ors on 20 January, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:320
MFA No. 200188 of 2020
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200188 OF 2020 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. DEVAJI @ DEVARAM S/O LIMBU CHAVAN,
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR,
2. MANISHA D/O DEVAJI @ DEVARAM CHAVAN,
AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD.
3. SANTOSH S/O DEVAJI @ DEVARAM CHAVAN,
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD.
4. ANITA D/O DEVAJI @ DEVARAM CHAVAN,
Digitally signed AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD.
by LUCYGRACE
Location: HIGH 5. SUNITA D/O DEVAJI @ DEVARAM CHAVAN,
COURT OF AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD.
KARNATAKA
6. SARITA D/O DEVAJI @ DEVARAM CHAVAN,
AGE: 17 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
THE APPELLANT NO.6 IS MINOR,
R/BY HER FATHER APPELLANT NO.1,
ALL ARE R/O H NO 16 ASHRAYA COLONY FILTERBED,
NEAR FILTER HOUSE SULTANPUR ROAD,
KALABURAGI-585 102.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. SANJEEVKUMAR C. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:320
MFA No. 200188 of 2020
HC-KAR
AND:
1. LAXMAN RATHOD S/O PREMSING,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. H NO 11, DADAR HOUSING BOARD MANEGALU,
TQ. SEDAM, DIST. KALABURAGI-585 102,
DEAD BY LRS.
1A. TULASIRAM S/O PREMSING RATHOD,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. KODLA CROSS VASAVADATTA
BARKESH COLONY, SEDAM,
DIST. KALABURAGI-585 102.
1B. NANDU S/O PREMSINGH RATHOD,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. CCI COLONY, KURKUNTA,
TQ. SEDAM, DIST. KALABURAGI-585 102.
2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD,
THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL MANGER,
N. G. COMPLEX, IN FORNT OF MINI VIDHANSOUDHA,
KALABURAGI-585 102.
3. KANTILAL NANDILAL DAKLIYA
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. H NO 884, VENKATESHWARAN SOCIETY
ASHRAM ROAD URULIKANCHAN
MAHARASHTRA-412 202.
4. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD,
THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
SANGAMESHWAR NAGAR S. B. TEMPLE ROAD,
KALABURAGI- 585102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHARANABASAPPA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI SANJAY M. JOSHI, ADVOCATE FOR R4;
V/O DTD. 29.04.2025 NOTICE TO R1(A) IS HELD SUFFICIENT
R1(B) SERVED
R3 SERVED)
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC-K:320
MFA No. 200188 of 2020
HC-KAR
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 22.03.2016 PASSED BY THE II ADDL. SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, KALABURAGI IN MVC NO.810/2016
AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY FIXING
ENTIRE LIABILITY ON RESPONDENT NO.2 TO PAY THE
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the
parties.
2. This appeal is arising out of the Judgment and
award dated 22.03.2019 in MVC No.810/2016 on the file of
the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kalaburagi
(for short 'the tribunal') granting compensation to the
claimants.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be
referred to as per their ranking before the tribunal.
4. The relevant facts for adjudication of this appeal
are that, the deceased Smt. Anjubai is the wife of claimant
NC: 2026:KHC-K:320
HC-KAR
No.1 and mother of claimant Nos.2 to 6. On 23.04.2016, the
deceased/Smt.Anjubai was proceeding on motorcycle
bearing registration No.MH-12/MK-819 as a pillion rider and
at that time another motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-
32/V-8237 being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent
manner and dashed to the motorcycle on which the deceased
was proceeding. In the aforementioned accident, both the
rider and the deceased (pillion rider) fell on the road and at
that time a lorry bearing registration No.MH-12/KP-3113, run
over the deceased and as such, the claimants filed petition
before the tribunal seeking compensation in respect of death
of Smt. Anjubai.
5. After service of notice, the respondent Nos.1, 2
and 4 entered appearance and contested the matter on
merits. Respondent No.3 placed ex-parte.
6. In order to establish their case, the claimants
have examined claimant No.2 as P.W.1 and got marked eight
documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8. Respondents have examined
one witness as R.W.1 and got marked two documents as
NC: 2026:KHC-K:320
HC-KAR
Ex.R.1 and Ex.R.2. The Tribunal after considering the
material record by its judgment and award dated 22.03.2019
awarded compensation of Rs.10,62,000/- along with interest
at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the
date of realization. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the
claimants have preferred the present appeal.
7. Heard Sri. Sanjeevkumar C. Patil, learned counsel
for the claimant/appellant, Sri. Sharanabasappa M. Patil,
learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Sri. Sanjay M.
Joshi, learned counsel for respondent No.4.
8. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing
for the appellant by referring to Ex.P.4 - Crime Details Form
and the Charge-sheet marked Ex.P.3 and submitted that, the
tribunal has committed an error in apportioning the liability
to an extent of 50% on the driver of the offending
motorcycle and the lorry in question and therefore sought
for, imposing the entire liability on the rider of the
motorcycle. It is also contended by the counsel of the
appellant as to the enhancement of compensation.
NC: 2026:KHC-K:320
HC-KAR
9. Per contra, learned counsels appearing for the
respondent Nos.2 and 4 sought to justify the impugned
judgment and award passed by the tribunal.
10. Having taken note of the submission made by the
learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute
as to the death of Smt. Anjubai in a road traffic accident on
23.04.2016. On careful consideration of the finding recorded
by the tribunal at paragraph No.20, I am of view that the
owner and insurer of both the vehicles are liable to pay
compensation at the ratio of 50:50 each. Therefore, the
contentions raised by the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant for modifying the liability cannot be accepted.
However, insofar as the amount of compensation is
concerned, the accident is of the year 2016. As per the
guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services
Authority, the relevant income of the deceased as per the
chart would be Rs.8,750/-. Taking into consideration that
there are six claimants, 1/4th has to be deducted towards
personal expenses of the deceased by applying the
NC: 2026:KHC-K:320
HC-KAR
appropriate multiplier of '14'. Hence, the loss of dependency
would be as under:
Rs.8,750/- minus 1/4th = Rs.6,563/-
Rs.6,563/- X 12 X 14 = Rs.11,02,584/-
11. Further this Court also finds it reasonable to
award a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards funeral and
transportation expenses and Rs.2,40,000/- (Rs.40,000/- X 6
claimants) towards filial consortium. Hence, the claimants
are entitled to total compensation as under:
Sl.No. Heads of compensation Amount
1 Loss of dependency Rs.11,02,584/-
2 Funeral and transportation Rs.25,000/-
expenses
3 Filial consortium Rs.2,40,000/-
(Rs.40,000/- X 6)
Total Rs.13,67,584/-
12. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in-part;
(ii) The claimants are entitled to total
compensation of Rs.13,67,584/- along with
NC: 2026:KHC-K:320
HC-KAR
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date
of petition till the date of realization as against
Rs.10,62,000/- awarded by the tribunal;
(iii) Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to
deposit the compensation amount in the ratio of
50:50, within a period of six weeks from the date
of this order;
(iv) In view of the order dated 28.08.2025
the claimants are not entitled for interest for the
delayed period of 187 days in filing the appeal.
Sd/-
(E.S.INDIRESH)
JUDGE
SVH
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30
CT:PK
