[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Smt Lakshmi vs Reshma K S on 13 March, 2026

                                              -1-
                                                          NC: 2026:KHC:15153
                                                        M.F.A. No.9881/2018
                                                    C/W M.F.A. No.6356/2018

                 HC-KAR




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                          DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
                                          BEFORE
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
                  MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.9881/2018 (MV-I)
                                              C/W
                  MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6356/2018 (MV-D)


                 IN M.F.A. No.9881/2018:

                 BETWEEN:

                 MALLESHA
                 S/O PUTTAMALLANAYAKA
                 AGED 23 YEARS
Digitally signed R/AT DODDIDUVADI VILLAGE
by ARSHIFA       KOLLEGAL TALUK
BAHAR KHANAM CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF         THE APPELLANT BECOME UNSOUND
KARNATAKA        DUE TO ACCIDENTAL INJURIES
                 HENCE THE APPELLANT IS REP.
                 BY HIS MOTHER SMT. SEEGAMMA
                 W/O PUTTAMALLANAYAKA
                 R/AT DODDIDUVADI VILLAGE
                 KOLLEGAL TALUK
                 CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT - 571 303.

                                                                ...APPELLANT
                 (BY SRI. SANATH KUMARA K.M. ADV.,)


                 AND:

                 1.    RESHMA K.S.
                       D/O SHIVAPRASAD K.G.
                             -2-
                                        NC: 2026:KHC:15153
                                      M.F.A. No.9881/2018
                                  C/W M.F.A. No.6356/2018

HC-KAR




     MAJOR
     R/AT 233-G, 4TH STAGE
     NETHAJI NAGAR
     MANDYA NAGAR- 571 401.

2.   THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
     IFFCO - TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE
     COMPANY LTD.,
     NO. 846, NEW KANTHARAJ URS ROAD
     ABOVE SRI BAKERY
     AKSHAYA BANDAR
     KUVEMPUNAGARA
     MYSURU - 570 0014.

                                           ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV., FOR R2
NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W ON 24.05.2023)

     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 31.01.2018 PASSED IN MVC
NO.262/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
JMFC, MACT, KOLLEGAL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.

IN M.F.A. NO.6356/2018:

BETWEEN:

1.   SMT. LAKSHMI
     W/O LATE MADESHA
     AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS.

2.   MASTER SHIVAPRASAD
     S/O LATE MADESHA
     AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS.

3.   MASTER KIRANKUMAR
     S/O LATE MADESHA
     AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS.
                             -3-
                                        NC: 2026:KHC:15153
                                      M.F.A. No.9881/2018
                                  C/W M.F.A. No.6356/2018

HC-KAR




4.   SMT. CHANDRAMMA
     W/O SHIVARAJU
     AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS.

5.   SRI. SHIVARAJU
     S/O LATE BOLANAYAKA
     AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS.

     APPELLANTS NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS
     REP. BY THEIR MOTHER 1ST APPELLANT.

     ALL ARE R/AT DODDIDUVADI VILLAGE
     KOLLEGALA TALUK
     CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT-571 305.

                                           ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. SANATH KUMARA K.M. ADV.,)

AND:

1.   RESHMA K.S.
     D/O SHIVAPRASAD K.G.
     MAJOR, R/AT 233-G
     4TH STATE, NETHAJI NAGAR
     MANDYA NAGAR 571401.

2.   THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
     IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE
     COMPANY LTD, NO. 846
     NEW KANTHARAJ URS ROAD
     ABOVE SRI. BAKERY
     AKSHAYA BANDAR
     KUVEMPUNAGARA
     MYSORE 570014.
                                       ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV., FOR R2
V/O/DTD:17.03.2026 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)
                                 -4-
                                            NC: 2026:KHC:15153
                                          M.F.A. No.9881/2018
                                      C/W M.F.A. No.6356/2018

HC-KAR




    THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:31.01.2018, PASSED
IN MVC NO.259/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE & JMFC., & MACT, KOLLEGAL, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

    THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

                        ORAL JUDGMENT

These appeals are filed by the claimants seeking

enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the

common judgment and award dated 31.01.2018 passed in

MVC Nos.259/2016 c/w MVC No.262/2016 on the file of

Senior Civil Judge & JMFC., and MACT, Kollegal, (for short,

'Tribunal').

2. Though these appeals are listed for orders, with

the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, they are

taken up for final disposal.

3. Sri.Sanath Kumara K.M., learned counsel for

the appellants submits that the Tribunal in both the cases

has committed a grave error in assessing the income of

NC: 2026:KHC:15153

HC-KAR

the injured at Rs.4,500/- per month and the income of the

deceased at Rs.9,000/- per month. He submitted that the

income of the injured and of the deceased is required to

be re-assessed appropriately. Insofar as the income of the

deceased is concerned, he submitted that Ex.P-6 Driving

licence of transport vehicle is produced to show that the

deceased was working as a driver and used to drive

Mahadeshwara bus, hence, he seeks to re-assess the

income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- per month. He

further submitted that the Tribunal, in the case of injured-

claimant, has failed to add 40% of the assessed income

towards the loss of future prospects. Hence, he seeks to

re-assess compensation in both the cases appropriately by

allowing the appeals.

4. Per contra, Sri.E.I.Sanmathi, learned counsel

for the respondent-Insurance Company in both the

appeals supports the impugned judgment and award of

the Tribunal and submits that in the case of injured-

claimant the Tribunal was fully justified in awarding

NC: 2026:KHC:15153

HC-KAR

compensation under all the heads by assessing the

disability at 100%, hence, there is no scope to enhance

the compensation. It is submitted that in the case of

death, the claimants have failed to produce any acceptable

evidence with regard to the income of the deceased to

show that he was a driver by vocation and mere

production of driving licence is not sufficient to assess his

income. Hence, he submits that the award of

compensation by the Tribunal in both the cases is just and

proper and needs no enhancement. Hence, he seeks to

dismiss both the appeals.

5. I have heard the arguments of the learned

counsel appearing on both the sides and meticulously

perused the material available on record.

6. The only point that would arise for

consideration in these appeals are :

NC: 2026:KHC:15153

HC-KAR

"Whether the common judgment and award

passed by the Tribunal calls for any

interference?"

7. It is not in dispute that the claim petition has

been filed by the injured in MVC No.262/2016 and the

wife, children and parents of the deceased, who are the

legal representatives of deceased have filed MVC

No.259/2016, seeking for compensation for the injury as

well as the death in the respective cases. The parties do

not dispute with regard to the accident and the liability.

Hence, the re-production of the facts may not be

necessary.

8. Insofar as in MVC No.262/2016 filed by the

injured-claimant, it is the case of the injured that the

Tribunal, considering the nature of injury suffered, has

assessed the disability at 100%, assessed the income at

Rs.4,500/- per month but it has failed to add 40% of the

assessed income under the head of loss of future

prospects of the injured. Therefore, the compensation is

NC: 2026:KHC:15153

HC-KAR

required to be re-assessed by re-assessing the income and

by adding 40% towards the assessed income under the

head of loss of future prospects. The injured was aged

about 30 years at the time of accident, hence, the

appropriate multiplier would be 17. Hence, the

compensation under the head of loss of future income due

to disability is re-assessed as under:

Rs.9,500 + 40% x 17 x 12 x 100% = Rs.27,13,200/-

The compensation awarded under other heads in

MVC No.262/2016 is unaltered. Thus, the appellant-

injured would be entitled to the modified compensation as

under:

                       HEADS                      AMOUNT
                                                  (in Rs.)
    Medical expenses                                 3,99,000
    Pain and sufferings, conveyance charges,          75,000

future medical expenses, nourishment charges, etc., Loss of future income 27,13,200 Future attendant's charges 3,06,000 Total 34,93,200

NC: 2026:KHC:15153

HC-KAR

Thus, the appellant-claimant in MVC No.262/2016 is

entitled to a total compensation of Rs.34,93,200/- as

against Rs.16,98,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

9. Insofar as MVC No.259/2016, the Tribunal has

assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- per

month. Admittedly, the claimants have failed to produce

any cogent and acceptable evidence to prove the income

of the deceased. The contention that the deceased was a

driver by vocation and was having a driving licence to

drive transport vehicle and used to earn Rs.15,000/- per

month cannot be accepted as the appellants-claimants

failed to examine any independent witness to prove the

vocation or the income of the deceased before the

Tribunal. Ex.P6, the driving licence to drive the transport

vehicle, cannot be the sole basis to determine the income

of the deceased. Hence, in the absence of proof of income

of the deceased, the income of the deceased is notionally

re-assessed at Rs.9,500/- per month placing reliance on

- 10 -

NC: 2026:KHC:15153

HC-KAR

the notional income chart prepared by the KSLSA. The

deceased was aged about 33 years at the time of accident.

Hence, claimants are entitled to addition of 40% under the

head of loss of future prospects and appropriate multiplier

would be 16. The claimants are the wife, children and

parents of the deceased, hence appropriate deduction

would be 1/4th towards the personal and living expenses of

the deceased. Thus, the claimants are entitled to

compensation under the head of loss of dependency,

which is re-assessed as under:

Rs.9,500 + 40% x 12 x 16 x ¾ = Rs.19,15,200/-.

10. The claimants, who are the wife, children and

parents, are entitled to consortium at the rate of

Rs.40,000/- plus 10% escalation i.e., Rs.40,000 + 10% =

Rs.44,000 x 5 = Rs.2,20,000/-. The claimants are also

entitled to compensation under the head of loss of estate

and funeral expenses at Rs.15,000/- respectively with

10% escalation i.e., Rs.16,500/- respectively. Thus, the

- 11 -

NC: 2026:KHC:15153

HC-KAR

claimants would be entitled to the modified compensation

as under:

                    Particulars                          Amount
                                                         (in Rs.)
      Loss of dependency                                   19,15,200
      Loss of estate                                          16,500
      Funeral expenses                                        16,500
      Loss of consortium (44,000 x 5)                       2,20,000
                       Total                              21,68,200

Thus, the appellants-claimants in MVC No.259/2016

is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.21,68,200/- as

against Rs.15,21,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

11. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the

following:

ORDER

a) Appeals are allowed in part.

b) The impugned judgment and award of the

Tribunal in MVC No.262/2016 is modified

to an extent that the appellant-claimant is

entitled to a total compensation of