Partly allowed¶¶58

The Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., v. R Ramachandrappa

Karnataka HC23 Jan 2026MFA/637/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: MFA (MV-D); Section 173(1) MV Act; MVC No.4369/2018; MACT Bengaluru; HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company; fatal road accident Bangarpet-Tekal Main Road; TATA ACE KA-53-C-8360 versus tipper lorry KA-53-D-3488; monthly income determination Rs.30,000; bank statements; no income tax returns; loss of dependency upheld; loss of consortium to parents Rs.80,000; interest reduced from 9% to 6% statutory rate; modified compensation Rs.44,19,200; remittance of deposit to Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Impugned award modified: compensation of Rs.44,19,200/- granted along with 6% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization; the amount in deposit before this Court to be remitted to the concerned Tribunal for disbursement as per the award. ¶¶58

The Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., Vs R Ramachandrappa — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶58

Issue for consideration

Whether the Tribunal was justified in taking the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.30,000/- for computing loss of dependency, in the absence of income tax returns. +2 more

¶¶38

Court's answer

The monthly income of Rs.30,000/- taken by the Tribunal to assess loss of dependency requires no interference; the Tribunal's assessment of loss of dependency is upheld notwithstanding that no income tax returns were filed.

¶¶46

Ratio / Principle

Since no consortium was awarded even though the deceased was survived by his parents, a sum of Rs.80,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 2) is awarded towards loss of consortium.

¶¶48

Key takeaways

The rate of interest is reduced from 9% to 6% per annum, the Tribunal having granted interest higher than the statutory rate.ratio¶¶55

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Insurance appeal under S.173(1) MV Act against MACT, Bengaluru award dated 18.06.2019 in MVC No.4369/2018 granting Rs.43,40,000 with 9% interest for the death of Harish, driver of a TATA ACE that collided with a tipper lorry insured with the appellant. Held: (i) monthly income of Rs.30,000/- fixed by the Tribunal on the strength of the deceased's bank statements (01.01.2017 to 26.07.2018) and June 2018 receipts of Rs.56,617/- calls for no interference despite absence of income tax returns; (ii) claimants (parents of the deceased) awarded Rs.80,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 2) towards loss of consortium, none having been granted by the Tribunal; (iii) interest reduced from 9% to 6% per annum, being the statutory rate. Compensation recomputed at Rs.44,19,200/- (dependency Rs.43,09,200 + loss of estate Rs.15,000 + funeral and obsequies Rs.15,000 + consortium Rs.80,000) with 6% interest from the date of the claim petition till realization; amount in deposit remitted to the Tribunal for disbursement.

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:4108-DB MFA No. 637 of 2020

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH MFA NO. 637 OF 2020 (MV-D)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

THE HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO 25/1 BUILDING NO 2 II FLOOR, SHANKARANARAYANA BUILDINGS M G ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001 BY ITS MANAGER (L)

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI. LINGARAJ H S., ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

R RAMACHANDRAPPA

¶15

Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶16

NOW AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS S/O CHIKKARAMAIAH

¶17

RATHANAMMA

¶18

NOW AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS W/O R RAMACHANDRAPPA

¶19

BOTH ARE R/A NIDAGATTA VILLAGE DASARAHALLI POST HOSAKOTE TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT - 562 114

¶20

M/S SRI BALAJI STONES CRUSHER HERADA KOTHURU VILLAGE TEKAL HOBLI, MALUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 562 104

¶21

¶22

NC: 2026:KHC:4108-DB MFA No. 637 of 2020

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

…RESPONDENTS

¶25

(BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K T., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2; R3 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶26

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.18.06.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.4369/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXIV ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.43,40,000/WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION.

¶27

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

¶28

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND

¶29

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

¶30

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶31

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶32

The present appeal has been filed by the appellant - insurance company impugning the award dated 18.06.2019, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal And V^th Additional Judge SCCH-20, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as ‘MACT’ for short) in MVC No.4369/2018.

¶33

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:4108-DB MFA No. 637 of 2020

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

The deceased Harish, died in a road traffic

¶36

accident while he was driving TATA ACE No.KA-53-C-8360 on Bangarpet-Tekal Main Road, near Rampura Gate, Bangarpet which met with an accident with a tipper lorry bearing registration No.KA-53-D-3488. The deceased died

¶37

on the spot. The tipper lorry was insured with the appellant – insurance company on which entire liability has been fixed.

¶38

Mr.H.S.Nagaraj, learned counsel for the appellant – insurance company has impugned the award only on the ground that the monthly income of the deceased taken at Rs.30,000/- per month is without any basis. He has further submitted that the bank statement of the deceased for the period from 01.01.2017 to 26.07.2018 has been taken into consideration to come to the conclusion that the deceased would have been earning atleast Rs.30,000/-. He submits that even if it is believed that the deceased had received the amount as mentioned in the statement of the bank account, he would have

¶39

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:4108-DB MFA No. 637 of 2020

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

incurred expenses for running the alleged transport business. It is further submitted that if he was earning Rs.30,000/- per month, he should have filed the income tax returns, but no income tax returns were filed or produced.

¶42

It is further submitted that the interest awarded at 9% per annum is much more than the statutory interest at 6% per annum and that as there was no sufficient proof for the monthly income, notional income at Rs.12,500/per month should have been taken by the Tribunal to calculated the damages / compensation.

¶43

We have considered the submissions. The bank statements of the deceased from 01.01.2017 to 26.07.2018 were produced to show that he was not a coolie or a labourer or an unemployed person. He was doing business and he was earning a good amount, he may not be paying the income tax, but the Tribunal considering the receipts for the month of June’2018, which

¶44

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:4108-DB MFA No. 637 of 2020

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

was for a sum of Rs.56,617/- had taken only at Rs.30,000/- as the monthly income in the preceding month of the death of the deceased. We do not find that the income Rs.30,000/- taken by the Tribunal to assess the loss of dependency requires any interference and therefore, we do not wish to interfere with the ‘loss of dependency’, assessed by the Tribunal.

¶47

We also note that no consortium was awarded

¶48

to the claimants, even though the deceased was survived by his parents, and therefore, we award a sum of Rs.80,000/- (Rs.40,000 x 2) towards loss of consortium. Thus, the claimants are entitled for compensation as

¶49

follows:

¶50

1.	Loss of Dependency	: Rs.	43,09,200/-
2.	Loss of Estate	: Rs.	15,000/-
3.	Funeral and Obsequies ceremonies	: Rs.	15,000/-
4.	Loss of consortium	: Rs.	80,000/-
	TOTAL	: Rs.	44,19,200/-

¶51

¶52

NC: 2026:KHC:4108-DB MFA No. 637 of 2020

¶53

HC-KAR

¶54

The Tribunal has granted interest at 9% per

¶55

annum, which is higher than the statutory rate of interest awarded, thus we reduce the rate of interest at 6% per

¶56

annum.

¶57

Therefore, we modified the impugned award

¶58

and grant of compensation of Rs.44,19,200/-, along with 6% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization. The amount in deposit before this Court shall be remitted back to the concerned Tribunal, for disbursement as per the award.

¶59

Sd/(D K SINGH) JUDGE

¶60

Sd/(S RACHAIAH) JUDGE

¶61

¶62

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14

The Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., v. R Ramachandrappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Ltd., v. R Ramachandrappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Thimmamma Vs State of Karnataka

Ipac Paper Boards (India) Private Limited Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited

Sri. a. M. Srinivasa Prasad Vs Shanthinikethan Residents Association

M Jayaram Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Venkatesh Vs Smt Annapurna

The General Secretary Vs the Senior Manager