Partly allowed

Smt Suvarna v. the Managing Director

Karnataka HC15 Jul 2026MFA/2430/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross appeals between claimants and KSRTC over compensation for two motorcyclists killed in a collision with a KSRTC bus. Court upheld the Tribunal's negligence finding, reassessed notional income and consortium with escalation, enhanced awards to Rs.48,69,500 and Rs.17,95,200 at 9% interest.

What did the court decide?

Claimant appeals partly allowed; awards modified to Rs.48,69,500/- and Rs.17,95,200/- with 9% p.a. interest on enhanced sums; deposit within six weeks.

Smt Suvarna Vs the Managing Director — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶2

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI

¶5

AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1519/2021 (MV-D)

¶7

C/W

¶8

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2430/2021 (MV-D) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7125/2021 (MV-D) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7126/2021 (MV-D)

¶9

IN M.F.A. No.1519/2021:

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SMT. BHAVANI W/O LATE RAKSHITH AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS.

¶13

KARNA .R D/O LATE RAKSHITH AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS MINOR REP BY HER MOTHER BHAVANI.

¶14

SMT. CHIKKAMANNAMMA W/O MARIYAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

¶15

SRI. MARIYAIAH S/O SANNAIAH

¶16

AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.

¶17

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶21

ALL ARE R/AT N. BEGUR VILLAGE ANTHARASANTHE HOBLI, H D KOTE TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT.

¶22

…APPELLANTS

¶23

(BY SRI. SYED ABDUL SABOOR, ADV.,)

¶24

AND:

¶25

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K S R T C, MYSURU RURAL DIVISION MYSURU 560015.

¶26

…RESPONDENT

¶27

(BY SRI. B.S. KARTHIKEYAN, ADV., FOR SMT. RAMYA H.N. ADV.,)

¶28

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN MVC NO.1176/2017 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SMALL CAUSES & SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MYSURU WHICH WAS DISPOSED OFF ON 28.1.2021 AND TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AGAINST THE AWARD PASSED BY THE TRAIL COURT A MEAGRE SUM OF RS.48,41,500/- AS AGAINST THE AWARD CLAIM BY THE APPELLANT A SUM OF RS.65,00,000/- AGAINST THE RESPONDENT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

¶29

IN M.F.A. NO.2430/2021:

¶30

BETWEEN:

¶31

SMT. SUVARNA W/O K. MAHADEVA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

¶32

K. MAHADEV S/O KARIYAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS.

¶33

BOTH ARE R/AT N. BEGUR VILLAGE ANTHARASANTHE HOBLI

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶36

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶37

H D KOTE TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT.

¶38

...APPELLANTS

¶39

(BY SRI. SYED ABDUL SABOOR, ADV.,)

¶40

AND:

¶41

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC MYSURU RURAL DIVISION MYSURU - 560 015.

¶42

...RESPONDENT

¶43

(BY SRI. B.S. KARTHIKEYAN, ADV., FOR SMT. RAMYA H.N. ADV.,)

¶44

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN MVC NO.1169/2017 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SMALL CAUSES & SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MYSURU WHICH WAS DISPOSED OFF ON 28.1.2021 AND TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AGAINST THE AWARD PASSED BY THE TRAIL COURT A MEAGER SUM OF RS.11,78,500/- AS AGAINST THE AWARD CLAIM BY THE APPELLANT A SUM OF RS.40,00,000/- AGAINST THE RESPONDENT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE

¶45

IN M.F.A. NO.7125/2021:

¶46

BETWEEN:

¶47

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC MYSURU RURAL DIVISION MYSURU.

¶48

...APPELLANT

¶49

(BY SRI. B.S. KARTHIKEYAN, ADV., FOR SMT. RAMYA H.N. ADV.,)

¶50

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶53

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶54

AND:

¶55

SMT. SUVARNA W/O LATE SRI K. MAHADEV AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS.

¶56

SRI. K. MAHADEV S/O SRI. KARIYAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS.

¶57

BOTH ARE R/OF N. BEGUR VILLAGE ANTHARASANTHE HOBLI H D KOTE TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT.

¶58

...RESPONDENTS

¶59

(BY SRI. SYED ABDUL SABOOR, ADV.,)

¶60

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.01.2021 PASSED BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT MYSURU (IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL SMALL CAUSES AND SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AT MYSURU), IN MVC NO.1169/2017, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶61

IN M.F.A. NO.7126/2021:

¶62

BETWEEN:

¶63

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC MYSURU RURAL DIVISION MYSURU.

¶64

...APPELLANT

¶65

(BY SRI. B.S. KARTHIKEYAN, ADV., FOR SMT. RAMYA H.N. ADV.,)

¶66

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶69

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶70

AND:

¶71

SMT. BHAVANI W/O LATE SRI RAKSHITH AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS.

¶72

SRI. KARNA .R S/O LATE SRI RAKSHITH AGED ABOUT 4 YEARS MINOR, REP BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT BHAVANI.

¶73

SMT. CHIKKAMANNAMMA W/O SRI MARIYAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS.

¶74

SRI. MARIYAIAH S/O SRI SANNAIAH AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS.

¶75

ALL ARE R/OF N. BEGUR VILLAGE ANTHARASANTHE HOBLI H D KOTE TALUK MYSURU DISTRICT -570026.

¶76

...RESPONDENTS

¶77

(BY SRI. SYED ABDUL SABOOR, ADV., FOR R1 TO R4)

¶78

¶79

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

¶80

¶81

HC-KAR

¶82

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶83

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶84

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶85

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶86

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)

¶87

MFA Nos.1519/2021 and 2430/2021 are filed by the

¶88

petitioners-claimants, whereas MFA Nos.7125/2021 and 7126/2021 are filed by the respondent-Corporation, challenging the common judgment and award dated 28.01.2021 passed in M.V.C.No.1176/2017 and M.V.C.No.1169/2017 by the Principal Judge, Court of Small Causes and MACT., Mysuru (for short, ‘the Tribunal’ ).

¶89

Though the appeals are listed for admission, with the consent of both the sides, they are taken up for final disposal.

¶90

Sri.Syed Abdul Saboor, learned counsel

¶91

appearing for the appellants-claimants in both the appeals submits that the claimants are seeking for higher

¶92

7 - NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶93

HC-KAR

¶94

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶95

compensation. Insofar as MVC No.1176 of 2017 is concerned, it is submitted that the Tribunal, though rightly assessed the income of the deceased Rakshith, but has failed to award compensation appropriately under the head of loss of consortium and other heads by awarding appropriate escalation as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd v. Pranay Sethi and Others¹ . Insofar as MVC No.1169/2017 is concerned, it is submitted the Tribunal has committed grave error in assessing the income of the deceased at ₹7,000/- per month, as the deceased Mahadevaswamy was aged about 21 years and bachelor, his income is required to be reassessed notionally at ₹ 11,000/- per month as per the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and adding 40% of the assessed income is required to be added towards future prospects. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has also erred in

1 2017 (16) SCC 680

HC-KAR

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶100

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶101

awarding consortium to the parents of the deceased at ₹80,000/- without applying appropriate escalation. Hence, he seeks to allow both the appeals of the claimants.

¶102

Per contra, Sri.B.S.Karthikeyan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-Corporation submits that the Tribunal has committed a grave error in recording the finding with regard to the aspect of negligence, as the material on record indicates that the vehicle, which met with the accident, was an unregistered vehicle, the rider as well as pillion rider were not wearing the headgears and

¶103

the rider was not having a valid driving licence. It is submitted that PW1 in her cross-examination has deposed that she is unaware as to whether the vehicle involved in the accident was registered or unregistered vehicle. Hence, these aspects are required to be looked into while considering the aspect of negligence. It is further submitted that as per Ex.P4 – rough sketch, the width of the road is 24 feet and the rider came on the right side of

¶104

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶105

HC-KAR

¶106

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶107

the road and caused the accident. The sketch clearly indicates that there was negligence on the part of the rider of the motorcycle, hence, appropriate finding is required to be recorded with regard to the contributory negligence and accordingly apportion the liability by allowing the appeals of the Corporation. It is also submitted that the Tribunal has assessed the income of both the deceased on higher side and awarded exorbitant compensation. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeals of the Corporation by dismissing the appeals filed by the claimants.

¶108

We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the claimants, learned counsel for the Corporation and meticulously perused the material

¶109

available on record including the Tribunal records.

¶110

The point that arises for consideration in these

¶111

appeals is:

¶112

10 -

¶113

HC-KAR

¶114

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶115

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶116

“Whether the impugned common judgment and award of the Tribunal in these appeals calls for any interference?”

¶117

The aforesaid point is answered in the

¶118

affirmative for the following reasons.

¶119

The wife, minor son and parents of deceased Rakshith have filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, seeking compensation of ₹65,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. for the untimely death of Sri.Rakshith in the road traffic accident that occurred on 06.10.2017. The said case is registered and numbered as MVC No.1176/2017.

¶120

The parents of deceased Mahadevaswamy have filed the claim petition seeking compensation of ₹40,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. The said claim petition was registered and numbered as MVC No.1169/2017.

¶121

11 -

¶122

HC-KAR

¶123

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶124

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶125

The material on record indicate that the

¶126

deceased Rakshith and Mahadevaswamy were proceeding on the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-45-Y-0469 from H.D.Kote Town towards Hand Post and at that time, the driver of the KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-09-F-4624 came from opposite direction, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the motorcycle, as a result the rider as well as the pillion rider fell down and sustained grievous injuries and they succumbed to the injuries.

¶127

It is averred that the deceased Rakshith was working as a Forest Watcher in the department of Forest Government of Karnataka and drawing salary of ₹19,384/per month and he was aged about 24 years at the time of accident. It is averred that the deceased Mahadevaswamy was aged about 21 years, bachelor, and was a coolie and he used to earn ₹15,000/- per month. The Corporation entered appearance and filed objections before the

¶128

12 -

¶129

HC-KAR

¶130

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶131

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶132

Tribunal denying the assertions made in the claim petitions, more particularly, denying the age, income and the aspect of negligence. The Tribunal framed the issues, recorded the evidence of the parties. The claimants examined themselves as PW1 and PW2 in both the cases and got marked Ex.P1 to P25 in MVC No.1176/2017 and Exs.P1 to P8 in MVC No.1169/2017. The Corporation examined one Suresh Desai, Law Officer, as RW1. The Tribunal considering the oral and documentary evidence on record has awarded total compensation of ₹48,41,500/in MVC No.1176/2017 and a total compensation of ₹11,78,500/- in MVC No.1169/2017 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation of the amount by apportioning the compensation among the claimants.

¶133

12. Insofar as MVC No.1176/2017 is concerned,

¶134

The Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the deceased Rakshith at ₹19,184/- considering the salary slip

¶135

13 -

¶136

HC-KAR

¶137

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶138

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶139

of the deceased produced at Exs.P11 to Exhibit P16 and added 50% of the assessed income towards the loss of future prosects and awarded compensation under the head of loss of dependency, hence, the same does not call for any interference. However, the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding compensation under the head of loss of consortium and conventional heads. The claimants are the wife, minor son and parents of the deceased Rakshith, hence all the claimants would be entitled to loss of consortium at the rate of ₹48,000/- each which includes 20% escalation. Similarly, the appellants-claimants would be entitled to a sum of ₹18,000/- under the head of ‘loss of estate’ and ₹18,000/- under the head of ‘funeral expenses & transportation of dead body’ which includes 20% escalation. Further, the compensation of ₹11,000/awarded by the Tribunal under the head of medical expenses is unaltered. Thus, the appellants/claimants in

¶140

MVC No.1176/2017 would be entitled to modified compensation as under:

¶141

14 - NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶142

HC-KAR

¶143

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶144

HEADS	AMOUNT (in Rs.)
Loss of dependency	46,30,500/-
Loss of consortium (48000 x 4)	1,92,000/-
Transportation of dead body & funeral expenses	18,000/-
Loss of estate	18,000/-
Medical expenses	11,000/-
Total	48,69,500/-

¶145

13. Insofar as MVC No.1169/2017 is concerned,

¶146

the Tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased Mahadevaswamy at ₹7,000/- per month. Admittedly, the claimants have failed to produce any cogent and legally acceptable evidence to prove the income of the deceased, hence, it would be appropriate to assess the income of the deceased notionally at ₹11,000/- per month by placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Having reassessed the income at ₹11,000/- per month, the claimants would also be entitled to addition of 40% of the assessed income under the head of loss of future prospects of the deceased. The deceased was aged about

¶147

15 - NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶148

HC-KAR

¶149

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶150

21 years, hence, the appropriate multiplier would be 18 and 50% of the assessed income would be deducted towards the personal and living expense of the deceased. Hence, the compensation under the head of loss of dependency is reassessed as under:

¶151

Rs.11,000 + 40% x 12 x 18 x 50%= Rs.16,63,200/-.

¶152

The claimants are the parents of the deceased. Hence, they would be entitled to compensation under the head of loss of consortium at ₹48,000/- each which includes 20% escalation. Similarly, the appellantsclaimants would be entitled to a sum of ₹18,000/- under the head of ‘loss of estate’ and ₹18,000/- under the head of ‘funeral expenses & transportation of dead body’ which includes 20% escalation. Thus, the appellants/claimants in MVC No.1169/2017 would be entitled to modified compensation as under:

¶153

16 - NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶154

HC-KAR

¶155

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶156

HEADS	AMOUNT (in Rs.)
Loss of dependency	16,63,200/-
Loss of consortium (48000 x 2)	96,000/-
Transportation of dead body & funeral expenses	18,000/-
Loss of estate	18,000/-
Total	17,95,200/-

¶157

The contention of the learned counsel for the

¶158

Corporation with regard to the negligence i.e., the rider as

¶159

well as the pillion rider of the motorcycle were not wearing the headgear and the rider was not having the valid driving licence and the motorcycle was unregistered is concerned, in our view the said contention cannot be accepted as there is no evidence on record to come a different conclusion than the conclusion arrived by the Tribunal with regard to the aspect of negligence. The claimants have placed the FIR, copy of the complaint and

¶160

the charge sheet material. The said documents clearly indicate that the accident is caused due to the actionable

¶161

17 -

¶162

HC-KAR

¶163

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶164

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶165

negligence on the part of the driver of the bus owned by the Corporation.

¶166

The evidence of PW2 in MVC No.1176/2017

¶167

clearly indicates that he was an eyewitness to the accident, who has clearly deposed before the Tribunal that accident was due to the actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the bus owned by the Corporation. Hence, in the absence of any contra evidence on record with regard to the aspect of negligence, we are of the view that the Tribunal was fully justified in recording the finding that the driver of the bus owned by the Corporation was negligent and caused the accident. The said finding of the Tribunal is in consonance with the evidence on record, hence, the same do not call for any interference.

¶168

The specific contention of the learned counsel for the Corporation that Ex.P4 - sketch indicates that the

¶169

rider of the motorcycle was on the wrong side is concerned, in our considered view, the sketch being the

¶170

18 - NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶171

HC-KAR

¶172

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶173

part of the charge sheet material, the same is considered and the Investigation Officer, after completion of the investigation, on collection of the evidence, has filed the charge sheet against the driver of the bus owned by the Corporation. Hence, placing reliance on Ex.P4 sketch alone may not be the basis to come to the conclusion that there was negligence on the part of the rider of the motorcycle, when there is a positive evidence available before the Tribunal i.e., charge sheet material, as well as the evidence of eye-witness, i.e., PW2. Hence, the appeals filed by the Corporation deserves to be dismissed.

¶174

The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a. in view of the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of SRI.BIMAL GOGAI

¶175

AND ANOTHER Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR, BMTC² .

¶176

In the result, we proceed to pass the following:

¶177

2 MFA No.10401/18 & con. appeal dt.09.06.26

¶178

19 -

¶179

HC-KAR

¶180

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶181

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶182

ORDER

¶183

a) MFA Nos.1519/2021 and 2430/2021 filed by

¶184

the claimants are allowed in part.

¶185

b) MFA Nos.7125/2021 and 7126/2021 filed by

¶186

the Corporation are dismissed .

¶187

c) The impugned judgment and award in M.V.C.No.1176/2017 is modified to an extent that the appellants-claimants would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.48,69,500/- as against Rs.48,41,500/awarded by the Tribunal.

¶188

d) The impugned judgment and award in M.V.C.No.1169/2017 is modified to an extent that the appellants-claimants would be entitled to a total compensation of

¶189

Rs.17,95,200/- as against Rs.11,78,500/awarded by the Tribunal.

¶190

20 -

¶191

HC-KAR

¶192

NC: 2026:KHC:36105-DB M.F.A. No.1519/2021 And connected with matter

¶193

CNR: KAHC010104982021

¶194

e) The enhanced compensation in both the

¶195

cases shall carry interest at the rate of 9%

¶196

p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.

¶197

f) The Corporation shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount along with interest in both the cases before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.

¶198

g) On such deposit, the enhanced compensation along with interest in MVC No.1176/2017 shall be released in favour of the claimants as per the ratio apportioned by the Tribunal.

¶199