Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Sowbagyamma on 10 April, 2026
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC:20239
MFA No. 3664 of 2017
C/W MFA.CROB No. 5 of 2019
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MFA NO. 3664 OF 2017 (MV-D)
C/W
MFA CROSS OBJECTION NO. 5 OF 2019 (MV-D)
IN MFA No. 3664/2017:
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, UNIT 401,
4TH FLOOR, SANGAM COMPLEX,
127, ANDHERI KURLA ROAD,
ANDHERI EAST,
MUMBAI - 400 059.
Digitally signed
by SUVARNA T NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ...APPELLANT
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI.B PRADEEP.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SOWBAGYAMMA ,
W/O LATE NAGARAJAPPA,
NOW AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
2. MANJANNA
S/O LATE NAGARAJAPPA,
NOW AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
BOTH ARE R/O NO.57,
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC:20239
MFA No. 3664 of 2017
C/W MFA.CROB No. 5 of 2019
HC-KAR
NAYAKANAHATTI, JANAKAL,
HOSADURGA TALUK,
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
NOW R/O PILLEKERENAHALLI VILLAGE,
IN JAYAMMA'S FARM HOUSE, CHITRADURGA.
3. KUTUKOURI BUCHIREDDY,
S/O K LAKSHMA REDDY,
OWNER OF LORRY BEARING
REG NO AP - 29-AW 4824 R/O 1-10-64/12,
CHAKRIPURAM, KUSHAIGUDA,
KEESARA (M), RANGAREDDY DIST,
ANDHRA PRADESH STATE - 500 018.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B PRAMOD.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2;
SRI. K B CHANDRASHEKARA SWAMY., ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED27.09.2016 PASSED IN MVC
NO.552/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE IST SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND IVTH MACT AT CHITRADURGA, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.8,53,164/- WITH INTEREST @ 8% P.A.
FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT.
IN MFA.CROB NO. 5/2019:
BETWEEN:
1. SMT. SOWBAGYAMMA,
W/O LATE NAGARAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
2. SRI. MANJANNA,
S/O LATE NAGARAJAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
BOTH ARE R/O 57, NAYAKANAHATTI,
JANAKAL, HOSADURGA TALUK,
CHITRDURGA DISTRICT.
NOW R/O PILLEKERNAHALLI VILLAGE
-3-
NC: 2026:KHC:20239
MFA No. 3664 of 2017
C/W MFA.CROB No. 5 of 2019
HC-KAR
IN JAYANNA'S FARM HOUSE, CHITRADURGA-577 501.
...CROSS OBJECTORS
(BY SRI. B PRAMOD.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. KUTUKOURI BUCHIREDDY
OWNER OF LORRY BEARING
REG NO.AP 29 AW 4824 R/O 1-10-64/12,
CHAKRIPURAM, KUSHAIGUDA, KEESARA (M)
RANGAREDDY DISTRICT,
ANDRA PRADESH STATE-500 018.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, UNIOT 401,
4TH FLOOR, SANGAM COMPLEX 127,
ANDHERI KKURLA ROAD,
ANDHERI (EAST), MUMBAI-400 059.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.CHANDRASHEKARA SWAMY.,ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI.B PRADEEP., ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO. 3664/2017 FILED UNDER
ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF THE CPC, READ WITH SECTION
173(1) OF M.V.ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 27.09.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.552/2014 ON THE
FILE OF THE 1ST SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND IVTH MACT,
CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA AND THIS MFA.CROB, COMING ON FOR FINAL
HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED
THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC:20239
MFA No. 3664 of 2017
C/W MFA.CROB No. 5 of 2019
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC No.552/2014 by the I Senior Civil Judge & IV MACT at Chitradurga, dated 27.09.2016, both the claimants as well as the insurance company are before this Court. The insurance company has filed MFA No.3664/2017 and the claimants have filed MFA CROB No.5/2019.
2. The Tribunal had granted the compensation as per the table given below:
SL. Heads Compensation
No. Awarded
1. Loss of dependency : Rs. 5,38,164/-
2. Funeral and obsequies : Rs. 10,000/-
3. Transportation : Rs. 5,000/-
4. Loss of consortium : Rs. 1,00,000/-
Love and affection to :
5. Rs. 1,00,000/-
petitioner No.2
Love and affection to :
6. Rs. 1,00,000/-
petitioner No.1
TOTAL : Rs. 8,53,164/-
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC:20239
MFA No. 3664 of 2017
C/W MFA.CROB No. 5 of 2019
HC-KAR
3. Learned counsel appearing for appellant/insurance company submits that there is no rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of borewell lorry and in that case when there is no negligence, the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. It is submitted that the owner of the vehicle does not accept the relationship with the deceased. It is submitted that the compensation that is awarded by the tribunal is on the higher side. Future prospects are taken at 15%. Even on the other conventional heads also the amount that is awarded by the tribunal is on the higher side. The Tribunal ought to have awarded interest at 6%, instead of 8%.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/claimants submits that, the tribunal has rightly considered the aspect of negligence. It is submitted that the use of vehicle itself is sufficient. Further, the owner of the vehicle has never denied the relationship. He stated that as the vehicle is insured with the appellant/insurance company, the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation. It is submitted that the tribunal ought to have taken the income at Rs.8,500/- as the accident had taken place in the year 2014. -6-
NC: 2026:KHC:20239 MFA No. 3664 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 5 of 2019 HC-KAR But the Tribunal had taken the income at Rs.6,500/-. Hence, compensation needs to be enhanced.
5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. First coming to the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant with regard to the negligence is concerned for claiming the compensation under the provisions in the Act, involvement of the vehicle is sufficient when the vehicle is used for digging the borewell, while digging the same as it pipes fell on the deceased, he died. In those circumstances, this Court is of the view that as the vehicle is insured with the insurance company, insurance company is liable to pay the compensation.
6. Then coming to the aspect of compensation, accident had taken place in the year 2014, this Court is taking the income at Rs.8,500/-. The deceased is aged about 60 years, therefore he is not entitled for future prospects. As there are two dependents, 1/3rd has to be deducted i.e. Rs.2,833/. Then the contribution to the family would be an amount of Rs.5,667/- per month. Hence, loss of dependency would comes to Rs.6,12,036/- (Rs.5,667x12x9). Towards consortium this Cour is granting an amount of Rs.96,000/- (48,000x2). -7-
NC: 2026:KHC:20239 MFA No. 3664 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 5 of 2019 HC-KAR Towards Funeral expenses this Court is granting an amount of Rs.36,000/-.
7. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala vs. M. Malathi and Another1, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses.
8. The claimant is therefore, entitled to the compensation under the following heads:
SL. Heads Compensation Compensation Awarded by Awarded by No. Tribunal this Court
1. Loss of dependency : Rs. 5,38,164/- 6,12,036/-
2. Funeral and : Rs. 10,000/- 36,000/-
obsequies
3. Transportation : Rs. 5,000/- 00/-
4. Loss of consortium : Rs. 1,00,000/- 96,000/-
Love and affection :
5. Rs. 1,00,000/- 00/-
to petitioner No.2 Love and affection :
6. Rs. 1,00,000/- 00/-
to petitioner No.1
5. Legal Expenses : Rs. 00/- 10,000/-
TOTAL : Rs. 8,53,164/- 7,54,036/-
1 (2014) 11 SCC 178 -8- NC: 2026:KHC:20239 MFA No. 3664 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 5 of 2019 HC-KAR
9. Altogether, the claimants are entitled for compensation of an amount of Rs.7,54,036/-.
10. Accordingly, the appeal of the insurance company is partly allowed by reducing the compensation from an amount of Rs.8,53,164/- to Rs.7,54,036/- and interest from 8% p.a. to 6% p.a.
11. Accordingly, cross-objection filed by claimants is dismissed.
i. The compensation amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
ii. The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the award passed by the Tribunal.
iii. The amount in deposit shall be forthwith transferred to the Tribunal.
iv. The respondent - insurance company shall deposit the remaining amount if any within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the amount as per the award. -9-
NC: 2026:KHC:20239 MFA No. 3664 of 2017 C/W MFA.CROB No. 5 of 2019 HC-KAR v. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay.
vi. No costs.
vii. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall
stand closed.
SD/-
(LALITHA KANNEGANTI)
JUDGE
PKN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 6