Smt. Beronika Tapnar Vs Sri. a Prakash

ALL ARE R/AT TINIKHARIJA MIRI VILALGE, P S RANGAPARA, SUB DIVISION-TEZPUR, SONITPUR DIST. ASSAM STATE - 784 001. RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 4 IS SINCE MINOR REP BY THEIR MOTHER 1^ST RESPONDENT AS NATURAL GUARDIAN.

¶26

SHRI A. PRAKASH, S/O ANTHONAPPA, 2^ND CROSS, DODDA BASAVANAPURA, K R PURAM, VIRGO NAGAR POST, BANGALORE - 560 049.

¶27

…RESPONDENTS

¶28

(BY SRI.JWALA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4; NOTICE TO R5 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 04.03.2021)

¶29

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.3.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.2338/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE 12TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.18,12,500/- WITH INTEREST 8% P.A FROM THE DATE OF THE CLAIM PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION.

¶30

3 -

¶31

NC: 2026:KHC:28626 MFA No. 3660 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 8 of 2022

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

IN MFA.CROB NO. 8/2022

¶34

BETWEEN:

¶35

SMT. BERONIKA TAPNAR, W/O LATE GABREL TAPNAR, AGED 39 YEARS,

¶36

ROBERT TAPNAR, S/O LATE GABREL TAPNAR, AGED 20 YEARS,

¶37

KUM. TERCHA TAPNAR, D/O LATE GABREL TAPNAR, AGED 17 YEARS,

¶38

KUM.DEEPIKA TAPNAR, D/O LATE GABREL TAPNAR, AGED 12 YEARS, THE CROSS OBJECTORS 3 & 4 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER - NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT.BERONIKA TAPNAR,

¶39

ALL ARE R/O TINIKHARIJA MIRI VILLAGE, P S RANGAPURA, SUB DIVISION-TEZPUR, SONITPUR DIST. ASSAM STATE - 784 001.

¶40

...CROSS OBJECTORS

¶41

(BY SRI. JWALA KUMAR., ADVOCATE)

¶42

AND:

¶43

SRI. A PRAKASH, S/O ANTHONAPPA, AGED 50 YEARS,

¶44

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:28626 MFA No. 3660 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 8 of 2022

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

2^ND CROSS, DODDA BASAVANAPURA, K R PURAM, VIRGO NAGAR POST, BENGALURU - 560 049.

¶47

THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NO.28, 5^TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, M G ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶48

...RESPONDENTS

¶49

(BY SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 14.11.2025)

¶50

THIS MFA CROB IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 R/W SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.03.2016 PASSED IN MVC.NO.2338/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU SCCH-8, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶51

THIS MFA AND MFA CROB, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶52

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶53

5 -

¶54

NC: 2026:KHC:28626 MFA No. 3660 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 8 of 2022

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶57

IN MFA No.3660/2016

¶58

This appeal is filed by the appellant-Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award dated 18.03.2016 passed in MVC No.2338/2015 on the file of the XII Additional Small Causes Judge and Member, MACT, Bangalore.

¶59

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondents. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience.

¶60

Gabrel Tapnar met with an accident on 19.03.2015 while crossing the road and died subsequently. His wife and children filed claim petition claiming compensation Rs.25,00,000/-.

¶61

4. Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.18,12,500/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶62

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:28626 MFA No. 3660 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 8 of 2022

¶63

HC-KAR

¶64

5. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant preferred the appeal and mainly contented that the Tribunal erred in taking the income of the deceased as Rs.7,000/- per month without any evidence and granted 50% towards future prospects though he was Government employee and the entire negligence was fixed on the driver of the Tipper Lorry. Petitioner was crossing the road at that time and he contributed for the accident. Tribunal granted higher compensation under the conventional heads and interest is to be reduced to 6% instead of 8%.

¶65

IN MFA Crob No.8/2022

¶66

6. Cross objection also filed by the claimants against

¶67

the same award in MVC No.2338/2015, for enhancement of the compensation and they mainly contended that Gabrel Tapnar was aged 36 years. He was doing coolie work and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. But the Tribunal erred in taking the amount as Rs.7,000/- per month without any basis and Tribunal rightly added future prospect for 50% and deducted 1/4^th towards his personal expenses. As he met with an accident in the year 2015, he is entitled for Rs.9,000/- towards

¶68

7 -

¶69

NC: 2026:KHC:28626 MFA No. 3660 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 8 of 2022

¶70

HC-KAR

¶71

notional income and requested for enhancement of the compensation.

¶72

7. The facts and evidence shows that while Gabrel Tapnar was crossing the road, the driver of the Tipper lorry came in a rash and negligent manner from Hosakote towards Kolar side and dashed him. As a result, he fell down and sustained injuries.

¶73

8. It is not the case of the claimants that he was crossing the road in a drunken condition or crossing negligently. It is for the insurance company to plead and prove contributory negligence. But they failed to take the said plea in the written statement. Therefore, now they cannot take the plea of contributory negligence and the argument of the appellant counsel cannot be accepted on that aspect.

¶74

9. Though petitioners stated that Gabrel Tapnar was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, he has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2015, in the absence of proof, this court finds it reasonable to take his notional income as Rs. 9,000/- per month, as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka Legal Service Authority. As he was

¶75

8 - NC: 2026:KHC:28626 MFA No. 3660 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 8 of 2022

¶76

HC-KAR

¶77

aged 36 years as on the date of the accident, relevant multiplier is '15' and he entitled for addition of 40% towards future prospects and 1/4^th is to be deducted towards personal expenses, loss of dependency comes to Rs.17,01,000/- (9,000 +40% x 12 X 15-1/4 ). Claimant No.1 is entitled for Rs.40,000/- towards spousal consortium and claimants No.2 to 4 are children of the deceased entitled for Rs.40,000/each towards parental consortium. Rs.30,000/- is granted under conventional heads. Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below:

¶78

Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below:

¶79

Sl.Nos.	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1	Towards loss of dependency	17,01,000/-
2	Towards consortium	1,60,000/-
	(40,000 X 4)
3	Towards conventional heads	30,000/-
	Total	18,91,000/-

¶80

9 - NC: 2026:KHC:28626 MFA No. 3660 of 2016 C/W MFA.CROB No. 8 of 2022

¶81

HC-KAR

¶82

Hence, the claimants are entitled for a total

¶83

compensation of 18,91,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a as against Rs.18,12,500/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶84

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶85

ORDER

¶86

i. MFA Crob 8/2022 is allowed in part.

¶87

ii. MFA 3660/2016 is dismissed.

¶88

iii. The judgment and award dated 18.03.2016 passed in MVC No.2338/2015 on the file of the XII Additional Small Causes Judge and Member, MACT, is modified.

¶89

iv. The claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs. 18,91,000/- along with interest at 6% p.a., instead of Rs.18,12,500/- granted by the tribunal.

¶90

v. Insurance Company has already deposited certain amount before the Tribunal, and they are directed to deposit the balance amount along with the interest at the rate

¶91