Smt Manjula Vs Sri Yallappa B K — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2025)

Smt Manjula Vs Sri Yallappa B K — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal allowed-in-part; impugned judgment and award dated 30.08.2022 in MVC No.412/2021 modified; claimants granted enhancement of Rs.6,43,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization; respondent No.2 to deposit the amount within six weeks from the date of the award; apportionment, deposit and release as per the Tribunal's award; Registry directed to send back trial court records with a copy of the judgment; modified award to be drawn accordingly.

Issue for consideration

Whether the income of the deceased was correctly assessed by the Tribunal for computation of loss of dependency (the only dispute identified in the case). +1 more

Court's answer

The income taken by the Tribunal is on the lower side; as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Service Authority, the income of the deceased is taken as Rs.15,000/- per month.

Ratio / Principle

Since the deceased was aged about 28 years at the time of the accident, 40% of his income is added towards future prospects, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi.

Key takeaways

The appropriate multiplier applicable to this case is 17.ratio¶58
The Tribunal has rightly deducted 1/4th of the income towards personal expenses, since 4 persons were depending upon the earnings of the deceased.ratio¶58
Loss of dependency works out to Rs.32,13,000/- (Rs.15,000 + 40% = Rs.21,000 per month; Rs.21,000 x 12 x 17 x 3/4).ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MFA No. 8504 of 2022 (MV-D) (HC-KAR, NC: 2025:KHC:45938) — Claimants' appeal under S. 173(1) MV Act for enhancement of compensation against the judgment and award dated 30.08.2022 in MVC No. 412/2021 (Principal Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT-III, Chitradurga), arising from the death of Lohith N.B. in an accident on 20.04.2021 caused by rash and negligent driving of tipper lorry KA-19-B8918. The only dispute was assessment of the deceased's income: the claimants contended he was a licensed JCB operator earning Rs.30,000/- p.m., but apart from the driving licence (Ex.P-9) no records were produced, and the Court declined to accept that figure. Holding: the Tribunal's income assessment was on the lower side; adopting the Karnataka State Legal Service Authority chart, income fixed at Rs.15,000/- p.m.; the deceased being aged about 28 years, 40% was added towards future prospects as per National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, (2017) 16 SCC 680; multiplier 17 applied; the Tribunal's 1/4th deduction towards personal expenses (four dependants) upheld; loss of dependency computed at Rs.32,13,000/-. After deducting Rs.25,70,400/- already awarded, enhancement rounded to Rs.6,43,000/-, payable with 6% p.a. interest from the date of petition till realization; respondent No.2 (Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.) to deposit within six weeks; apportionment, deposit and release as per the Tribunal's award; compensation under other heads left undisturbed. Appeal allowed-in-part. (Umesh M Adiga, J.)

1 - NC: 2025:KHC:45938 MFA No. 8504 of 2022

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 7^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8504 OF 2022 (MV-D)

BETWEEN:

SMT. MANJULA W/O LATE LOHITH N.B, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS

MADHAN L.M S/O LATE LOHITH N B AGED ABOUT 7 YEARS

SINCHANA L D/O LATE LOHITH N B AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS

SMT MANJULA

Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka

W/O LATE BALAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS

APPPELLANT NO.2 AND 3 ARE MINORS REP. BY THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER APPELLANT NO.1 SMT. MANJULA W/O LATE LOHITH N.N

ALL ARE RESIDING AT HULLURU VILLAGE CHITRADURGA TALUK - 577 501.

…APPELLANTS

(BY SRI. B. PRAMOD, ADVOCATE)

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:45938 MFA No. 8504 of 2022

HC-KAR

AND:

SRI. YALLAPPA B K S/O KALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS OWNER OF TIPPER LORRY BEARING REG NO.KA 19 B 8918 R/O BEDARASHIVANAKERE VILLAGE CHITRADURGA TQ - 577 501.

THE BRANCH MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE KUDALA SANGAMESHWARA ARCADE NO.1 OPP JAGALURU MAHALINGAPPA TOWERS CHITRADURGA - 577 501.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. B. VIJAYA KUMAR, DVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 24.03.2025, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.08.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO. 412/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT-III, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:45938 MFA No. 8504 of 2022

HC-KAR

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimants being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 30.08.2022 passed in MVC No.412/2021 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT-III, seeking enhancement of

compensation.

Though this matter is slated for admission and

with a consent of both the sides, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.

It is the case of claimants that one Lohith N.B.,

met with an accident on 20.04.2021 at about 07.30 p.m., near the Obalanarasimha Swami High School, Janukonda Village, Chitradurga Taluk, due to rash and negligent driving of the tipper lorry bearing registration No.KA-19-B8918. As a result, he sustained grievous injuries and while undergoing treatment, succumbed to the injuries. The

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:45938 MFA No. 8504 of 2022

HC-KAR

claimants being his legal representatives have filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Respondent No.1 is the owner and respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending vehicle.

From the rival contentions of the parties, the

Tribunal framed necessary issues, for its determination.

The claimants to prove their case, examined

one witness as PW-1 and marked 14 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-14.

The only dispute in this case is regarding assessment of income of the deceased..

The learned counsel appearing for the

appellants contend that the deceased was operator of a JCB machine and he had a valid licence and permit to operate the same. But, the Tribunal has not taken into account about the said profession while assessing the income. Therefore, he prays to assess the appropriate income of the deceased and enhance the compensation.

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:45938 MFA No. 8504 of 2022

HC-KAR

The respondent No.2 seriously opposes the said contention and submits that, there is no need to interfere in the findings of the Tribunal.

As noted by the Tribunal undisputedly, no documents have been produced by the appellants/claimants except the driving licence as Ex.P-9. If the deceased was actually employed and earning the income as mentioned in the claim petition, the claimants ought to have produced relevant records and examined the owner of the JCB to prove that the deceased was earning Rs.30,000/- per month. In the absence of the same, it is difficult to accept the contention of the claimants.

The income taken by the Tribunal is on the lower side. As per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Service Authority, income of the deceased can be taken as Rs.15,000/- per month. The deceased was aged about 28 years at the time of the accident. Therefore, 40% of his income is to be added towards

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:45938 MFA No. 8504 of 2022

HC-KAR

future prospects, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., -VSPRANAY SETHI AND OTHER¹ . U ndisputedly, the appropriate multiplier applicable to this case is 17. The Tribunal has rightly deducted 1/4^th of the income towards personal expenses, since 4 persons were depending upon the earning of the decease. Therefore, the claimants are entitled to compensation under the head of 'Loss of Dependency' as follows:

Rs.15,000 + 40% = Rs.21,000 per month

Rs.21,000 x 12 x 17 x 3/4 = Rs.32,13,000/-

After deducting the amount of Rs.25,70,400/- already awarded by the Tribunal, the enhancement will be Rs.6,42,600/-, rounded off to Rs.6,43,000/-.

The compensation awarded by the Tribunal

under the other heads is found to be proper and does not

1 (2017) 16 SCC 680

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:45938 MFA No. 8504 of 2022

HC-KAR

call for any interference. Undisputedly, the respondents

are liable the said amount.

For the reasons stated above, I pass the following:

ORDER

i) The appeal is allowed-in-part.

ii) The impugned judgment and award dated dated 30.08.2022 passed in MVC No.412/2021 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT-III, is modified;

iii) The claimants are entitled to enhancement of Rs.6,43,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

iv) Respondent No.2 is liable to deposit the said amount within a period of six weeks from the date of the award.

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:45938 MFA No. 8504 of 2022

HC-KAR

v) The apportionment, deposit and release etc., are as per the award passed by the Tribunal.

vi) The Registry is directed to send back the Trial Court Records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.

Draw the modified award accordingly.

Sd/(UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE

SMC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12