Partly allowed

Smt. Jitali Gogoi v. Sri Ramanjalu Nayak B

Karnataka HC6 Jul 2026MFA/9448/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimants appealed for enhancement of compensation for the death of a school driver in a road traffic accident. The High Court accepted the salary certificate and witness evidence fixing monthly income at Rs.22,000, applied 40% future prospects, and awarded 20% escalation on conventional heads, enhancing compensation.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation of Rs.10,97,008 with 6% interest from date of petition; insurer to deposit within 6 weeks failing which 9% interest; apportionment between claimants with minor's share in fixed d

Smt. Jitali Gogoi Vs Sri Ramanjalu Nayak B — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF JULY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 9448 OF 2025

¶8

(MV-D)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

SMT. JITALI GOGOI W/O HIREN SAIKIA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS.

¶11

KUM.ELIZA SAIKIA D/O HIREN SAIKIA AGE ABOUT 09 YEARS.

¶12

APPELLANT No. 2 BEING MINOR REPRESENTED BY NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER APPELLANT No. 1

¶13

Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

BOTH ARE RESIDINT AT: TALAP GAON, TINUSUKIA ASSAM PRESENTLY R/A No.15, 1^ST CROSS VINAYAKANAGAR KALI TEMPLE ROAD, OPP. SHARANYA SHANTHINIKETHAN, APARTMENT, WHITEFILED BENGALURU – 560 066.

¶15

…APPELLANTS

¶16

(BY SRI. GURUDEVA PRASAD K T, ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

SRI RAMANJALU NAYAK B S/O B.GOPE NAYAK AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS No.233, CHEEMASANDRA VILLAGE

¶19

2 - NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

VIRGONAGAR POST NEAR SUBRAMANYA TEMPLE BENGALURU-560 049.

¶22

M/s TATA AIG GEN.INS.CO.LTD., BY ITS MANAGER MOTOR CLAIMS HUB No.69, J.P. AND DEVI JAMBUKESHWARA ARCADE 3^RD FLOOR, MILLERS ROAD BENGALURU-560 052.

¶23

…RESPONDENTS

¶24

(BY SRI B PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2 V/O DTD. 25.02.2026, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶25

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:24.04.2025 PASSED IN MVC No.7966/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT-3, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶26

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

¶27

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

This appeal is filed by claimants seeking

¶30

enhancement of compensation awarded in Judgment and

¶31

Award dated 24.04.2025 passed in MVC No.7966/2023 by

¶32

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

XV Additional Small Causes Judge and MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-19).

¶35

2. Even though the appeal is listed today for admission, it is taken up for disposal with the consent of learned counsel for appellants and learned counsel for respondent No.2 –Insurer.

¶36

3. Appellants -claimants made a claim petition praying to award compensation for the death of Hiren Saikaia who died in a road traffic accident occurred on 27.11.2023, contending that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent of the driving of the driver of Tipper Lorry bearing registration No.KA-53/AB-1797. The Tribunal recorded the evidence, appreciating the evidence, assessed the compensation and awarded the

¶37

compensation under different heads as under:

¶38

	Under the Heads of:	Amount in Rs.
1.	Loss of dependency	28,67,328/-
2.	Loss of consortium	40,000/-
3.	Towards loss of Filial Consortium	40,000/-

¶39

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

Towards funeral and 15,000/- obsequies ceremonies

¶42

5. Towards loss of estate 15,000/- Total 29,77,328/-

¶43

4. The Tribunal has also awarded interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation and directed respondent No.2 -insurer to pay award amount with interest. Claimants seeking enhancement of compensation have filed present appeal.

¶44

5. Heard learned counsel for appellants and learned counsel for respondent No.2 –insurer.

¶45

6. Learned counsel for appellants would contend that the deceased was working as driver in school and letter issued by the school -Ex.P15 indicate that the deceased was working as driver in the school and was paid salary of Rs.22,000/-per month. The author of the said document has been examined by P.W.2 and attendance register has also been produced at Ex.P18. Even though the Tribunal has held that claimants have proved that the deceased was working in school, has failed to take the

¶46

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

salary into consideration and took the notional income. The Tribunal has not awarded escalation at 20% on conventional heads, since the accident has taken place after 06 years of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd Vs Pranay Sethi and Ors¹ . With these, he prays to allow the appeal and enhancement of compensation.

¶49

7. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that claimants have not produced supporting documents namely bank account statement etc., in order to show that they are getting income stated in Ex.P15 and therefore, the Tribunal has rightly taken notional income. Even claimants are not produced driving license of the deceased. With these, he prays to dismiss the appeal.

¶50

8. Having heard learned counsels, this Court has

¶51

perused impugned judgment and award.

¶52

9. The deceased was aged 34 years as on the date of the accident. The accident occurred on 27.11.2023.

¶53

1 In AIR 2017 SC 5157

¶54

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

Ex.P15 is letter issued by KSVK School. In the said letter,

¶57

it is stated that the deceased was working as driver in the school and getting salary of Rs.22,000/- per month. P.W.2 is Coordinator, Administrative KSVK School and he has given evidence that the deceased was working as a driver and he was paid salary of Rs.22,000/- per month. The said salary was paid sometimes by cash and sometimes through account. Ex.P18 is the attendance register of the deceased produced by P.W.2. Considering the said aspect, it is clear that the deceased was working as driver in KSVK School. Merely because the supporting documents are not proved, the evidence of P.W.2 cannot be disbelieved regarding the income of the deceased. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajwati @ Rajjo and Ors² has observed as under:

¶58

“ 20. In view of the above, we do not agree with the view taken by the High Court while rejecting the salary certificate (Exhibit 19) and pay slip (Exhibit 20) of the deceased merely on the ground that the person issuing the two

¶59

2 In 2022 SCC Online SC 1699

¶60

¶61

NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

aforementioned documents was not examined before the Learned Tribunal. The said documents are conclusive proof of the income of the deceased and were also corroborated by the statements of the deceased’s wife (Appellant No. 1 herein) and his co-workers. As such, the High Court was not justified in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.4,836/- per month on the basis of minimum wages fixed by the State at the relevant time. Resultantly, we affirm the findings of the Learned Tribunal so far as they relate to assessing the deceased’s income at Rs.11,225/- per month on the basis of aforementioned two documents. Annual income of the deceased, therefore, amounts to, Rs.11,225/- x 12 = Rs.1,34,700/-.“

¶64

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the said case has accepted

¶65

salary certificate even though the author has not been examined. In the said case, the Hon’ble Apex Court has relied upon salary certificate and pay slip even though no supporting documents are produced to indicate credit of the salary to the account of the deceased. In the case on hand, the author is examined in order to prove the salary of the deceased. Therefore, the Tribunal has erred in

¶66

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶67

HC-KAR

¶68

considering the evidence of P.W.2 and letter–Ex.P15. As per evidence of P.W.2 and Ex.P15, the deceased was getting the salary of Rs.22,000/- per month. Therefore, the income of the deceased is to be taken at Rs.22,000/In view of the above, loss of dependency is calculated as under:

¶69

Rs.22,000/- +40% (8,800/-) =Rs.30,800/- minus 1/3^rd = Rs.20,533/- x12x16 = Rs.39,42,336/-

¶70

10. The Tribunal has rightly awarded consortium and conventional heads but failed to taking into consideration of escalation. As per the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra ), claimants are entitled to compensation under conventional heads with escalation at 10% for every 03 years. The accident has occurred after 06 years of the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Pranay Sethi (Supra ) and therefore, claimants are entitled to escalation at 20% on conventional heads. Considering the same, claimants are entitled to consortium in sum of rupees Rs.48,000/-

¶71

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶72

HC-KAR

¶73

each i.e., Rs.96,000/-, funeral expenses in sum of Rs.18,000/- and loss of estate in sum of Rs.18,000/-. Claimants are entitled to total compensation under different heads as under:

¶74

	Under the Heads of:	Amount in Rs.
1.	Loss of dependency	39,42,336/-
2.	Loss of consortium	48,000/-
3.	Towards loss of Filial Consortium	48,000/-
4.	Towards funeral and obsequies ceremonics	18,000/-
5.	Towards loss of estate	18,000/-
	Total	40,74,336/-

¶75

Claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.40,74,336/- as against Rs.29,77,328/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. Consequently, claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.10,97,008/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

¶76

In view of the above, the following,

¶77

10 -

¶78

NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶79

HC-KAR

¶80

ORDER

¶81

i) The appeal is allowed in part.

¶82

ii) Appellants -claimants are entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.10,97,008/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

¶83

iii) Respondent No.2 -insurer shall deposit the said enhanced compensation with interest before the Tribunal within a period of 06 weeks from this date, failing which it is liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum from this day till payment.

¶84

iv) The claimant No.1 is entitled to Rs.5,97,008/and claimant No.2 is entitled to Rs.5,00,000/with interest.

¶85

v) The claimant No.1 is entitled to release of entire enhanced compensation amount.

¶86

11 -

¶87

NC: 2026:KHC:33620 MFA No. 9448 of 2025

¶88

HC-KAR

¶89

vi) The share of the claimant No.2 shall be kept in a fixed deposit in Karnataka Bank, City Civil Court Branch, Bengaluru till claimant No.2 attains majority.

¶90

Sd/-

¶91

(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶92

DSP

¶93

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62

Smt. Jitali Gogoi v. Sri Ramanjalu Nayak B

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Jitali Gogoi v. Sri Ramanjalu Nayak B

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh M H Vs B Kare Rangappa

Smt. Sudha Vs the Bengaluru Development Authority

Sri.Guruswamy Vs Sri.N.Vasantha Kumar

Mr Victor D Souza Vs the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation

Sri Mahaveer Khidrapur Vs Sri Ramesh Padiyappa Muttappagol

Sri Mahaveer Khidrapur Vs Sri Ramesh Padiyappa Muttappagol