Dismissed¶37

The Deputy Commissioner v. Kariyamma

Karnataka HC22 Sept 2025MFA/6931/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

MFA No.6931/2017 (MV-D), High Court of Karnataka, decided 22.09.2025 by P. Sree Sudha, J. Keywords: fatal motor accident 01.05.1996; NH-4 Agalakuppe Cross; car KA-06-G-72; rash and negligent driving; deceased minor aged 12 years; multiplier based on age of deceased vs age of mother; Sarla Verma (2009) 6 SCC 121 distinguished; legal heir certificate; grandmother's testimony; notional income Rs.30,000/- p.a.; multiplier 15; loss of dependency Rs.4,50,000/-; total compensation Rs.4,71,000/- with 6% interest; MVC No.184/2011 Fast Track Court Tumkur; Section 173(1) MV Act appeal by Deputy Commissioner and Karnataka Government Insurance Department; award confirmed; appeal dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.184/2011 dated 17.11.2014 stands confirmed. ¶37

The Deputy Commissioner Vs Kariyamma — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.184/2011 dated 17.11.2014 stands confirmed.

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal on the basis of the age of the deceased (a 12-year-old boy) is correct, as against the appellants' contention that the multiplier should be taken based on the age of the mother of the deceased. +1 more

¶28

Court's answer

The Tribunal rightly held the claimant to be the mother of the deceased, the deceased's grandmother having been examined and having deposed that the claimant is her daughter; the Court finds no reasons to interfere with that finding despite the absence of a legal heir certificate.

¶32

Ratio / Principle

The multiplier is to be taken considering the age of the deceased, not the age of the mother; the Tribunal's adoption of multiplier 15 for the deceased, a 12-year-old minor, therefore calls for no interference.

¶36

Key takeaways

The quantum fixed by the Tribunal (multiplier 15, notional income of Rs.30,000/- p.a., Rs.4,50,000/- towards loss of dependency, total compensation of Rs.4,71,000/-) requires no interference and stands confirmed.ratio¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Motor Vehicles Act, S.173(1) — Fatal road accident of 01.05.1996 at Agalakuppe Cross on NH-4, Tumkur: car KA-06-G-72 driven rashly and negligently caused the death of Badavegowda, aged 12 years. Tribunal (MVC No.184/2011, Fast Track Court, Tumkur) awarded Rs.4,71,000/- with 6% p.a. interest, adopting multiplier 15 and notional income Rs.30,000/- p.a. State appellants (Deputy Commissioner, Tumkur District and Karnataka Govt. Insurance Department) relied on Sarla Verma (Smt) v. Delhi Transport Corporation, (2009) 6 SCC 121, urging that the multiplier be based on the mother's age, and objected that no legal heir certificate proved the claimant to be the deceased's mother. Held: the multiplier is to be taken considering the age of the deceased, not the mother's; the grandmother's testimony established the claimant as the mother; the quantum needs no interference. Appeal dismissed; Tribunal's award confirmed.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC:38056 MFA No. 6931 of 2017

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P. SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6931/2017 (MV-D)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶8

Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: High Court of karnataka

¶9

THE KARNATAKA GOVT. INSURANCE DEPARTMENT, TUMKUR.

¶10

(BY SRI. R.A. MACHAKANUR, AGA)

¶11

&APPELLANTS

¶12

AND:

¶13

KARIYAMMA W/O LATE BADAVEGOWDA YALERAMPURA, IRAKASANDRA COLONY POST NOW RESIDING AT HANUMANTHAPURA TUMKUR.

¶14

&RESPONDENT

¶15

(RESPONDENT SERVED)

¶16

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN MVC NO.184/2011 ON THE FILE OF FIRST TRACT AND ADDL. MACT-V AT TUMKURU, VIDE ITS JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 17^TH NOVEMBER 2014 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶17

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

¶18

¶19

NC: 2025:KHC:38056 MFA No. 6931 of 2017

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

This appeal is preferred against the award dated 17.11.2014 passed in MVC No.184/2011 by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Tumkur (for short, 'Tribunal').

¶24

It is the case of the respondent/claimant that on 01.05.1996, when one Badavegowda along with his grandmother was crossing the NH-4 road at Agalakuppe Cross, a car bearing Reg.No.KA-06-G-72 came at high speed, in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against Badavegowda as a result he sustained injuries and died. His mother and Kariyamma, w/o late Badavegowda filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- with interest at 12%p.a. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record, granted Rs.4,71,000/- with interest at the rate of 6%p.a. from date of petition till realisation.

¶25

Aggrieved by the said award of the Tribunal, respondents therein i.e., Deputy Commissioner and the

¶26

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:38056 MFA No. 6931 of 2017

¶27

HC-KAR

¶28

Karnataka Government Insurance Department, have preferred this appeal. They mainly contended that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SARLA VERMA (SMT) AND OTHERS VS. DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER¹ , the multiplier is to be taken basing on the age of the mother and not basing on the age of the deceased. They also contended that no legal heir certificate is filed to show that

¶29

the respondent/claimant is the mother of the deceased.

¶30

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant for

¶31

the appellants. Inspite of service of notice, respondent/claimant remained absent.

¶32

The perusal of the judgment of the Tribunal shows that the grand mother of the deceased was examined and she stated that claimant is her daughter and thus the Tribunal has rightly held that she is the mother of the deceased and this Court finds no reasons to

¶33

1 (2009) 6 SCC 121

¶34

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:38056 MFA No. 6931 of 2017

¶35

HC-KAR

¶36

interfere with the said order. Though the appellants have contended that the multiplier is to be modified as per the age of the mother, but it is clear that multiplier is to be taken considering the age of the deceased. Admittedly, the deceased was aged 12 years at the time of accident, he

¶37

met with an accident. Considering the age of the deceased, a minor boy, the Tribunal has taken the multiplier as 15 and notional income as Rs.30,000/-p.a. and granted compensation of Rs.4,50,000/- towards loss of dependency and awarded total compensation of Rs.4,71,000/-, and this Court finds no reasons to interfere with the said order. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellants is dismissed confirming the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.

¶38

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶39

BSR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

The Deputy Commissioner v. Kariyamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Deputy Commissioner v. Kariyamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. Ramaswamy Vs Mr. Venkatesh

Mr K Madhava Kotian Vs Mr Suresh Puthran

Smt Jayalakshmi Vs Balachandran @ Balasubramani N

Sri. C S Paramesha Vs Sri. Chanakeshawa

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Shakunthalamma

Sri N S Jagadish Vs United India Insurance Co.Ltd.