Rathnamma Vs M.M.Ajjaiah — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Rathnamma Vs M.M.Ajjaiah — Karnataka HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal allowed; judgment and award dated 22.06.2013 in MVC No.82/2010 (Old No.1024/2009) modified; claimants entitled to Rs.8,88,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization (instead of Rs.5,19,000/- granted by the Tribunal); Insurance company directed to deposit the amount and may recover it from the owner of the vehicle (pay and recovery per MFA No.1039/2014); petitioner No.1 permitted to withdraw the entire deposited amount with accrued interest.

Issue for consideration

Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in MVC No.82/2010 for the death of K.T. Manjunath should be enhanced. +2 more

Court's answer

40% is added towards future prospects.

Ratio / Principle

Notional monthly income of the deceased fixed at Rs.4,500/- per the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority chart, as the accident occurred in 2008 and no income proof was filed.

Key takeaways

Age of the deceased at the date of accident taken as 39 years, based on school certificate Ex.P11 showing birth in the year 1969.ratio¶42
The Tribunal's multiplier of 15 is confirmed.ratio¶42
One-third is deducted towards personal expenses because the parents, who had been added as claimant Nos.3 and 4, died during the pendency of the claim petition.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Motor Accident Claims — enhancement via cross-objection (Order 41 Rule 22 CPC) — High Court of Karnataka, 01.04.2026, P Sree Sudha J. Claimants (widow Rathnamma and minor son M Swamy of deceased K.T. Manjunath, killed in the accident of 07.04.2008) cross-objected to the award of Rs.5,19,000/- dated 22.06.2013 by the Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Channagiri in MVC No.82/2010 (old No.1024/2009), seeking enhancement. With no income proof filed, the court adopted notional income of Rs.4,500/- p.m. per the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority chart; age fixed at 39 years from school certificate Ex.P11 (born 1969); Tribunal's multiplier of 15 confirmed; 40% added for future prospects; 1/3rd deducted towards personal expenses as the parent-claimants (Nos.3 & 4) died during pendency. Loss of dependency Rs.7,56,000/-; spousal consortium Rs.48,000/- to petitioner No.1 and filial consortium Rs.48,000/- each (total Rs.96,000/- for 8 claimants); conventional heads Rs.36,000/-; total Rs.8,88,000/- with 6% p.a. interest from date of petition till realization. Appeal allowed; award modified; pay and recovery (already ordered in MFA No.1039/2014) — insurer directed to deposit and may recover from vehicle owner; petitioner No.1 permitted to withdraw the entire deposit with accrued interest.

NC: 2026:KHC:17875 MFA.CROB No. 75 of 2016

1 -

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 1^ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

MFA CROSS OBJECTION NO. 75 OF 2016 (MV-D)

BETWEEN:

RATHNAMMA W/O LATE K T MANJUNATHA, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, KULENUR, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

M SWAMY S/O LATE K T MANJUNATHA, AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, SINCE MINOR REP. THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN & MOTHER SMT. RATHNAMMA RESP.NO.1 KULENUR, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

…CROSS OBJECTORS

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka

(BY SRI. S V PRAKASH., ADVOCATE)

AND:

M.M. AJJAIAH S/O NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, DRIVER OF LUGGAGE AUTO RICKSHWA, BEARING NO KA-17/6024, R/O GEDDALAHATTI VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

C.S. YOGENDRAPPA S/O C K SIDDALINGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,

NC: 2026:KHC:17875 MFA.CROB No. 75 of 2016

2 -

HC-KAR

OWNER OF LUGGAGE AUTO RICKSHWA, BEARING NO KA-17/6024, R/O KULENUR VILLAGE, CHANNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

THE MANAGER BANK LTD., M/S ICICI, BELLAD & COMPANY, 2ND FLOOR, GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI, NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS BANGALORE OFFICE, NO. 89, 2ND FLOOR, S.V.R.COMPLEX, HOSUR MAIN ROD, MADIWALA, BANGALORE - 560 068 REP. BY ITS MANAGER LEGAL.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. A.M. VENKATESH, ADVOCATE TO R3, R2-SERVED, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)

THIS MFA.CROB IS FILED U/O 41, RULE 22 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED22.6.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.82/2010(OLD NO.1024/2009) ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, CHANNAGIRI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON 27.01.2026 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, P SREE SUDHA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

CAV JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants

challenging the judgment and award dated 22.06.2013 passed in MVC No.82/2010 (old No.1024/2009) passed by Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Channagiri.

3 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17875 MFA.CROB No. 75 of 2016

HC-KAR

Heard the argument of learned counsel for appellants and learned counsel for respondents. The ranks of the parties are retained as per tribunal for the sake of convenience.

The claimants filed a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering entering evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.5,19,000/-.

Aggreived by the said award, claimants are before this court and contended that K.T. Manjunath who died in an accident on 07.04.2008 was aged 32 years. However, the Tribunal ought to have taken his income as Rs.5,000/- per month and the amount granted under loss of dependency is on lower side. Further, it is submitted that the amounts granted under other heads are also meager. Thus requested for enhancement of the compensations.

Though it is stated that the deceased KT Manjunath was doing agriculture and business earning Rs.15,000/- per month they have not filed any income proof. As the deceased met with an accident in the year 2008, this court finds it

4 -

NC: 2026:KHC:17875 MFA.CROB No. 75 of 2016

HC-KAR

reasonable to take the notional income as Rs.4,500/- as per the

chart prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority.

Further, it is stated that he was aged 38 years, but he produced his school certificate under Ex.P11. As per the said document, he was born in the year 1969 and met with an accident in the year 2008 and thus he was aged 39 years and as on the date of accident. The tribunal has rightly considered the multiplier of ’15; and it is hereby confirmed. He is also entitled for 40% towards future prospects and at the time of filing claim petition, parents of the K.T. Manjunath were also alive, they were added as claimant No.3 and 4, but during the pendency of the claim petition, they died. Therefore, this court finds it reasonable to deduct 1/3^rd towards personal expenses. Hence, loss of dependency comes to Rs.4,500 + 40% x 12 x 15 - 1/3 = Rs.7,56,000/-. Further, petitioner No.1 is entitled for spousal consortium of Rs.48,000/- and petitioner No.2 is entitled for fililial consortium of Rs.48,000/each, respectively. Also, they are also entitled for Rs.36,000 under the convention head.

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:17875 MFA.CROB No. 75 of 2016

HC-KAR

Thus in all, components awarded by this court are as

below,

Sl. Nos .	Particulars	Amount in Rs.
1	Towards loss of dependency	7,56,000
2	Towards loss of consortium	96,000
	(8 claimants)
3	Conventional heads	36,000
	Total	8,88,000

Hence, the compensation granted by tribunal is enhanced from Rs.5,19,000/- to Rs.8,88,000 /- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

In the result, the following order is passed:

ORDER

i. Appeal is allowed .

ii. The judgment and award dated 22.06.2013 passed in MVC No.82/2010 (Old No.1024/2009) on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT at Channagiri, is modified.

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:17875 MFA.CROB No. 75 of 2016

HC-KAR

iii. The claimants are entitled to a sum of Rs.8,88,000/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.5,19,000/- granted by the tribunal.

iv. Already pay and recovery is ordered in MFA No.1039/2014. Therefore, Insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation amount and they are at liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle.

v. On such deposit, petitioner No.1/the wife of the deceased is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same.

Sd/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

AKV CT:NR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1