Bangalore District Court
Nethra.V vs Hdfc Ergo General Ins Co Ltd on 16 March, 2026
KABC0B0034212023
BEFORE THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL & XV ADDL. JUDGE (SCCH-19),
Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru.
Dated this the day 16th day of March 2026
PRESENT:
SRI. MOHAN SADASHIV POL,
B.A., LL.B(SPL)
XV ADDL. SMALL CAUSE JUDGE & MACT,
Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru.
MVC No.3788/2023
1) Smt. Nethra W/o. Rohith M.
Age 23 years.
2) Baby of Nethra V. D/o. Rohith M.
Age 6 months.
(Petitioner No.2 being minor R/by her
Mother & N/G Petitioner No.1)
3) Mr. Muniswamy S/o. Ayyappa
Age 49 years.
4) Smt. Jayamma W/o. Muniswamy
Age 45 years.
5) Miss. Sunitha M. D/o. Muniswamy
Age 25 years.
6) Miss. Lihitha M. D/o. Muniswamy
Age 23 years.
SCCH-19 2 MVC.3788/2023
All are R/at No.223, 5th Main Road,
Near Carmel School, Bhovi Colony,
Basaveshwaranagar, Bangalore-79. .... Petitioners
(By Sri.B.S.D. Adv.,)
-V/s-
1) HDFC ERGO Gen. Ins. Co., Ltd.,
No.25/1, 2nd Floor, Building No.2,
Shankaranarayana Building No.1,
M.G. Road, Bangalore-560 001.
(Policy No.2312203805552700000,
Valid Upto : 11/11/2020 to 10/112025)
2) Mr. Ramesh S.
S/o. Ramanayaka,
R/at Old No.826A, New No.9/1,
7th Main Road, 6th 'D' Cross,
Prakash Nagar, Near Ayyappa Temple,
Srirampuram, Bangalore-560 021.
...Respondents
(R.1 by Sri. K.N. Adv.,),
(R.2 by Sri. B.M.A. Adv.,)
Date of Institution of Suit : 14-06-2023
Nature of Suit : U/Sec.166 of MV Act.
Date of commencement of : 13-02-2024
Recording of Evidence
Date of pronouncement of : 16-03-2026
Judgment
Total Duration : Year Months Days
02 09 02
SCCH-19 3 MVC.3788/2023
JUDGMENT
The petitioners filed this petition U/Sec.166 of M.V.Act,1988 claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,00,000/- from respondents due to death of Rohith M. in a road traffic accident.
2. Brief facts of petitioners case are that, on 21-05- 2023 at about 9.30 p.m. the deceased Rohith M. was riding in his Scooter bearing Reg.No.KA-41/EJ-6365 on the extreme left side of 3rd Cross Road, Saneguruvanahalli, Bangalore, i.e., from Nethaji Circle and towards Attimara (Fig Tree) Circle, reached near Rajanna Tea Shop, at that time, all of a sudden a rider of motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02/KG-4693 riding from Attimara (Fig Tree) Circle in a rash and negligent manner, endangering to human life, came at high speed on wrong lane and lost control over his motorcycle and dashed against the deceased Scooter, caused the accident, due to forced impact, the deceased fell down and sustained grievous injuries to face and head. Immediately, the deceased was shifted to Shanbhag Hospital for first aid, further shifted to Nimhans Hospitals and to Vijayanagar Global Hospital, Bangalore wherein he was admitted as an inpatient. Again he was shifted to Trustwell Hospital, Bangalore for further management. But, inspite of best treatment SCCH-19 4 MVC.3788/2023 he died in the hospital on 31-05-2023. After postmortem, the body was handed over to the petitioners and they performed funeral, obsequies, last rites ceremony in their native place, for which they have spent more than Rs.8,00,000/-.
3. Prior to the date of accident deceased was hale, healthy and aged about 27 years and working as a Sales and Service Technician in Urban Clap, Bangalore and running M.M. Enterprises, Bangalore and earning Rs.75,000/-p.m. He was only earning member in the family and was contributing his entire earnings to his family. The accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the rider of the Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02/KG-4693, against whom the Vijayanagar Traffic Police have registered criminal case in Cr.No.66/2023. Respondent No.1 being Insurer and Respondent No.2 being owner of the offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners pray to grant the compensation.
4. In pursuance to the notice, respondent No.1 and 2 have appeared through their respective counsel and filed their separate objections to the main petition.
SCCH-19 5 MVC.3788/20235. Brief averments of the objections of respondent No.1 is that, it has admitted the issuance of insurance policy in respect of the offending motorcycle belongs to respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 has not complied with the mandatory provision of M.V. Act. It is further contended that, the deceased/rider of the motorcycle was not having valid D.L. at the time of accident. The complaint lodged on 24-05-2023, after the lapse of 4 days from the date of alleged accident. As per the FIR and complaint unknown motorcycle was caused the accident, though the complaint lodged after lapse of 4 days from the date of accident, it would clearly shows that it is a hit and run case, however the petitioners by suppressing the material facts have cooked up a false story by implicating the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA- 02/KG-4693 in the alleged accident in order to wangle an award. The accident was caused due to the negligent act of the deceased. This respondent further contended that, the said motorcycle was not at all involved in the alleged accident, the deceased himself was solely responsible for the alleged accident. The driver of the offending motorcycle did not possess the valid DL as on the date of alleged accident and there is a violation of the terms and conditions of the policy and denied the accident caused by the rider of the offending motorcycle. Further, denied the date, time SCCH-19 6 MVC.3788/2023 and place of the accident, age, income and occupation of the deceased. It is contended that, the compensation amount claimed is highly excessive and exorbitant. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition against this respondent.
6. Brief averments of the objections of respondent No.2 is that, the petitioners have filed this petition by suppressing the materials true facts, the petition filed by the petitioners is not maintainable either in law or on facts, hence, it is liable to be dismissed in limine. It is further contended that, his motorcycle is not involved in the accident and it has been falsely implicated in this case with the aid of the police authorities to make a wrongful gain. It is further contended that, respondent No.2 is having valid vehicle documents, insurance and D.L. to the driver of the vehicle. It is contended that, the compensation amount claimed is highly excessive and exorbitant. Hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.
7. Based on the above pleadings, this Tribunal framed the following:
ISSUES
1) Whether the petitioners prove that, on 21-
05-2023 at about 09.30p.m. when the husband of the 1st petitioner i.e., the deceased Mr. Rohith M. was riding his Scooter bearing SCCH-19 7 MVC.3788/2023 Reg.No.KA-41/EJ-6365 on 3rd Cross Road, Saneguruvanahalli, Bangalore i.e., from Nethaji Circle towards Attimara Circle, when reached near Rajanna Tea Shop, at the time rider of one Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA- 02/KG-4693 rode the same in a rash and negligent manner so as to endangering to human life, came at high speed from Attimara Circle came on wrong lane and lost the control over his motorcycle and dashed against the deceased's Scooter. As a result of forced impact deceased fell on road and sustained grievous injuries and died in the hospital, during the course of treatment?
2) Whether the petitioners are entitled for the compensation? if so, to what amount and from whom?
3) What order or award?
8. In order to substantiate the case, petitioner No.3 got examined himself as PW.1 and got marked 34 documents marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.34 and the petitioners have also examined one eyewitness by name Sri. Siddaraju as PW.2 and got marked a document as Ex.P.35. Petitioners got examined the employer of the deceased by name E. Umapathy, Regional Manager and Authorized Representative of the Urban Clap Technologies Ltd., Bangalore as PW.3 and got marked 03 documents as per Ex.P.36 to P.38. Further, the petitioners got examined the Dr. Kamalini Venkat as PW.4. Further, got examined the PSI of SCCH-19 8 MVC.3788/2023 Vijayanagar Traffic Police, Bangalore as PW.5 and got marked 09 documents as Ex.P.39 to P.47. Further got examined MRD Incharge at Trustwell Hospitals, Bangalore by name Chandan D.A. as PW.6 and got marked 05 documents as Ex.P.48 to P.52. Further got examined the Doctor by name Dr. Kiran J. who is the Medical Officer at Vijayanagar Global Hospital, Bangalore as PW.7 and got marked 05 documents as Ex.P.53 to P.57.
9. On the other hand, respondent No.2 got examined himself i.e., the Owner of the offending motorcycle by name Ramesh S. as RW.1 and got marked 02 documents as Ex.R.1 and R.2. Further, the respondent No.1 got examined its Assistant Vice President Litigations Claims as RW.2 and got marked a document as Ex.R.3.
10. Heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record.
11. For the following reasons, this Tribunal answer the above Issues as under:-
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative.
Issue No.2 : In the Partly Affirmative. Issue No.3 : As per final Order.
for the following:SCCH-19 9 MVC.3788/2023
REASONS
12. Issue No.1:- The petitioners filed this petition against respondents for claiming compensation, due to death of husband of petitioner No.1, father of petitioner No.2, son of the petitioner No.3 and 4 and brother of petitioner No.5 and 6 in a road traffic accident.
13. In order to substantiate the case, petitioner No.3 got examined himself as PW.1 and filed affidavit in lieu of chief-examination and in his chief-affidavit, he had reiterated the entire contention of petition and got marked 34 documents as Ex.P.1 to P.34. Ex.P.1 is the copy of F.I.R, Ex.P.2 is the copy of complaint, Ex.P.3 is the copy of Police Intimation, Ex.P.4 is the copy of statement, Ex.P.5 is the copy of requisition, Ex.P.6 is the copy of Mahazar with Spot Sketch, Ex.P.7 is the copy of Inquest Report, Ex.P.8 is the copy of PM Report, Ex.P.9 is the copy of IMV Report, Ex.P.10 is the copy of Letter, Ex.P.11 is the copy of confession Statement, Ex.P.12 is the copy of Notice U/Sec.133 of IMV Act, Ex.P.13 is the copy of Reply to the Notice, Ex.P.14 is the Indemnity Bond, Ex.P.15 is the copy of Charge Sheet, Ex.P.16 is the copy of Aadhar Card of deceased, Ex.P.17 is the copy of PAN Card of deceased, Ex.P.18 is the Lerner's Licence of Deceased, Ex.P.19 to 24 are the copies of Aadhaar Cards of petitioner No.1 SCCH-19 10 MVC.3788/2023 to 6, Ex.P.25 is the Discharge Summary, Ex.P.26 is the Estimation, Ex.P.27 is the IP Advance Receipt, Ex.P.28 is the Medical Bills, Ex.P.29 is the Prescriptions, Ex.P.30 is the copy of Birth Certificate of petitioner No.2, Ex.P.31 is the Statement of Gross earnings, Ex.P.32 is the Bank Statement of Kotak Mahindra Bank, Ex.P.33 is the MM Enterprises Card of Deceased and Ex.P.34 is the MM Enterprises 2 books. In cross examination, he has stated that, the police have visited the hospital on the same day. Further stated that, the rider of two wheeler was also injured and treated in hospital and got repaired his vehicle.
14. The petitioners have examined one eyewitness by name Sri. Siddaraju as PW.2 and got marked Aadhar card as Ex.P.35. In chief-examination he has stated that, on 21-12-2023 at about 9.30 p.m. he was sitting in front of Rajanna Tea Stall, while deceased was riding his motorcycle, at that time, the rider of motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02/KG-4693 rode the motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner, came on wrong lane and lost the control and dashed to the deceased motorcycle. In cross-examination he has stated that, he has given the vehicle number in Shanbagh Hospital. Further, denied that, he had not seen the accident.
SCCH-19 11 MVC.3788/202315. The petitioners have examined Sri. E. Umapathi who is the employer of the deceased being the Regional Manager and Authorized Representative of the UrbanClap Technologies Ltd., as PW.3 and got marked 03 documents as Ex.P.36 to P.38. Ex.P.36 is the Authorization Letter, Ex.P.37 is the service agreement, Ex.P.38 is the statement of earnings of the deceased.
16. The petitioners have examined Doctor of Sooraj Clinic, Manjunathanagar, Bangalore by name Dr. Kamalini Venkat as PW.4. In chief-examination she has stated that, she is running a clinic by name Sooraj Clinic at Manjunathanagar, Bangalore. Further, stated that, on 22-05-2023 injured by name Mr. Raja was came to her clinic with alleged history of RTA and he was sustained injuries to right foot. Further, she had treated and referred him to Dr. Raju Naik, Cauvery Orthopaedic Centre, Bangalore. The original documents are given to the patient. In cross- examination she has admitted that, she has not registered the MLC and no police intimation was issued.
17. The petitioners have examined the PSI of Vijayanagar Traffic Police Station by name Sri. Mahesh K.N. as PW.5 and got marked 09 documents as Ex.P.39 to 47. Ex.P.39 is the copy of statement of the SCCH-19 12 MVC.3788/2023 accused, Ex.P.40 to 46 are the Hospital documents. Ex.P.47 is the copy of the garage receipt. In chief- examination he has stated that, he has deputed Police Constable by name Sri. Ranganath and he has traced out the offending vehicle and informed the concerned to appear in police station. On 29-05-2023 the rider of offending vehicle Raja came to the police station and admitted the accident and given confession statement. Further, it stated that he received the medical documents of the injured Raja from the Sooraj Hospital and Jindal Hospital for taking the treatment. He has also received the receipt from Teach Sai Bikes Garage for getting repair the offending vehicle. In cross- examination he has stated that, he has recorded the statement of mechanic by name Sri. Arjun.
18. The petitioners have examined the MRD Incharge of Trustwell Hospitals, Bangalore as PW.6 and got marked 05 documents as Ex.P.48 to 52. Ex.P.48 is the Authorization Letter, Ex.P.49 is the Inpatient Records, Ex.P.50 is the Police Intimation, Ex.P.51 is the Copy of MLC Register and Ex.P.52 is the X-ray Films.
19. The petitioners have examined the Medical Officer of Vijayanagar Global Hospital, Bangalore by name Dr. Kiran J. as PW.7 and got marked 05 documents as Ex.P.53 to 57. Ex.P.53 is the Authorization Letter, SCCH-19 13 MVC.3788/2023 Ex.P.54 is the Police Intimation, Ex.P.55 is the Copy of MLC Register, Ex.P.56 is the Inpatient Records and Ex.P.57 is the X-ray Film.
20. Per contra, respondent No.2 got examined himself as RW.1 and got marked 02 documents as Ex.R.1 and R.2. Ex.R.1 is the Copy of R.C. Card and Ex.R.2 is the Copy of D.L. In chief-examination he has stated that, he is the owner of vehicle No.KA-02/KG-4693 and it is not involved in the accident. The vehicle has been falsely implicated in this case. In cross-examination he has admitted that, at the time of accident his friend Raja was riding the said motorcycle. The said Raja got an injury to his right foot in the said accident and on 22-05-2023 he got treatment in Saroja Clinic and Jindal Charitable Hospital. Further admitted that, the said motorcycle has been got repaired by Raja in Team Sai Bikes Garage.
21. Respondent No.1 got examined its Assistant Vice President-Litigation's-Claims as RW.2 and got marked insurance copy as Ex.R.3. In chief-examination he has stated that, the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02/KG- 4693 is not involved in the accident. The owner has not intimated the said incident. The FIR was registered on an unknown vehicle. The number of motorcycle has not been mentioned in the hospital records. The SCCH-19 14 MVC.3788/2023 accident took place due to the negligent riding of the petitioner himself. The insured vehicle has been falsely implicated in this case. In cross-examination he has stated that, he is deposing on the basis of police records and he has no personal knowledge about the accident. Further, he admits that the accident took place in between two motorcycles.
22. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted his arguments by contending that, the accident took place due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of offending motorcycle. Hence, prayed to award the compensation. Further relied on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Kerala reported in 2012 ACJ 1370 between New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Pazhananiammal & Others. Further, on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in 2012 ACJ 2569, between Shalini & Others Vs. Herbajan & Others. Further on Judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in 2011 ACJ 552, between Saroja & Others Vs. Hetlal & Others. Further relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in 2007 ACJ 2824, between New India Assurance Co., Ltd., Vs. G. Vijaya Kandiban & Another. On the ground of negligence, involvement of vehicle and delay in filing of the complaint. The judgments have been taken into SCCH-19 15 MVC.3788/2023 consideration during the discussion of the particular aspect.
23. Ld. Counsel for respondent No.1 has submitted his arguments by contending that, the accident occurred due to sole negligence on the part of the deceased and insured vehicle has been falsely implicated. As per the FIR and complaint unknown motorcycle was caused the accident. The complaint lodged is lodged after lapse of 4 days from the date of accident. The accident was caused due to the negligent act of the deceased. Therefore, prays to dismiss the petition.
24. Ld. Counsel for respondent No.2 has submitted his arguments by contending that, the allegations made in the petitioner are totally far from truth and the vehicle of the respondent has never been involved in the accident and further the vehicle has been falsely indulged in this case to make a wrongful gain from this respondent. Therefore, prays to dismiss the petition.
25. Respondent No.1 and 2 have denied the involvement of the offending vehicle in the alleged accident.
SCCH-19 16 MVC.3788/202326. RW.1 the owner of the motorcycle has stated that, his vehicle has been falsely implicated in this case. But, in cross-examination he has admitted that, at the time of accident his friend Raja was riding the said motorcycle. The said Raja got the injury to his right foot in the said accident and got treatment in Saroja Clinic and Jindal Charitable Hospital. Further admitted that, the said motorcycle has been got repaired by Raja in Team Sai Bikes Garage. On perusal of cross examination of RW1, he has clearly admitted the accident and involvement of his motorcycle in the accident.
27. RW.2 has contended that the FIR was registered on an unknown vehicle. The number of motorcycle has not been mentioned in the hospital records. The insured vehicle has been falsely implicated in this case. But, in his cross-examination he has stated that, he is deposing on the basis of police records and he has no personal knowledge about the accident. Therefore, it appears that, RW.1 has no personal knowledge about accident.
28. Further, P.W.1 has stated that, the rider of two wheeler was also injured and treated in hospital and got repaired his vehicle. PW2 the eye witness has stated that, on 21-12-2023 at about 9.30 p.m. he was SCCH-19 17 MVC.3788/2023 sitting in front of Rajanna Tea Stall, while deceased was riding his motorcycle, at that time, the rider of motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02/KG-4693 rode the same in a rash and negligent manner, came on wrong lane and lost the control and dashed to the deceased motorcycle. On perusal of the evidence of PW.2 it is clear that, he has seen the accident and identified the rider and the offending vehicle.
29. PW.3 is the doctor who has treated the rider of the offending vehicle Mr. Raja. She has stated that, on 22- 05-2023 injured by name Mr. Raja was came to her Sooraj Clinic with alleged history of RTA and he was sustained injuries to right foot. Further, she has treated and referred him to Dr. Raju Naik, Cauvery Orthopaedic Centre, Bangalore. On perusal of the evidence of PW.3, it appears that, the rider of the offending vehicle Raja has sustained injuries and taken treatment on the next day of the accident in the clinic of PW.3.
30. PW.5 the I.O. has stated that, Police Constable by name Sri. Ranganath has traced out the offending vehicle and informed the concerned to appear in police station. On 29-05-2023 the rider of offending vehicle Raja came to the police station and admitted the accident and given confession statement. Further, it SCCH-19 18 MVC.3788/2023 has stated that he has received the medical documents of the injured Raja from Sooraj Hospital and Jindal Hospital for taking the treatment. He has also received the receipt from Teach Sai Bikes Garage for repairing the offending vehicle. On perusal of the evidence of PW.5 which corroborates the evidence of PW.3, it appears that, the rider of offending vehicle Raja has sustained the injuries in the accident and got repaired his vehicle.
31. PW.5 has produced confession statement of the accused and hospital documents at Ex.P.39 to P.46. On perusal of Ex.P.39 it appears that, the accused has admitted the accident caused by him and injuries to the deceased and himself. It is stated that, he has sustained injury to the right leg, shoulder and stomach. Further, on perusal of Ex.P.41 the Medical Prescription issued by the Dr. Kamalini Venkat of Sooraj Clinic, it appears that, the rider of offending vehicle Raja has take treatment at the said hospital on 22-05-2023, further on perusal of Ex.P.40, it appears that, PW.4 has referred the patient to Dr. Rajeev Naik, Orthopaedic on 22-05-2023. On perusal of Ex.P.42 to P.44 it appears that, the said Raja has taken X-ray for his right foot and as per Ex.P.44 he sustained fracture shaft of the proximal phalange and base of the distal SCCH-19 19 MVC.3788/2023 phalange of the great. On perusal of Ex.P.45 and P.46 it appears that, the said Raja has also taken treatment in Jindal Charitable Hospital on 26-05-2023. Therefore, on perusal of these documents, it is clear that, the rider Raja has sustained injury in the said accident to his right foot and taken treatment by PW.4. Further, PW.5 has produced Ex.P.47 the receipt of garage by name Team Sai Bikes dtd:26-05-2023. On perusal of the same, it appears that, the vehicle bearing No.KA-02/KG-4693 was repaired and welding was done.
32. Further, on perusal of Ex.P.9 IMV report, it discloses that, fresh damages are noticed on the motorcycle of the deceased and offending motorcycle No. KA-02/KG-4623 at the time of inspection. The offending vehicle has sustained the damages on its Front wheel mudguard, headlight assembly damaged, clutch lever broken, rear left indicator damaged. On perusal of the documents, it appears that, the offending vehicle has sustained the damages as above in the said road traffic accident. On perusal of the entire material available in hand, it is clear that, the rider of offending vehicle by name Raja was riding the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02/KG-4693 and dashed to the motorcycle of the deceased and caused SCCH-19 20 MVC.3788/2023 the accident. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the opinion that, the offending motorcycle was caused the alleged accident.
33. Respondent No.1 has contained that, there is delay of 04 days in filing the complaint. On perusal of Ex.P.2 the complaint it appears that, the accident took place on 21-05-2023 at about 9.30 pm. On perusal of Ex.P.25, P.54 to P.56 it appears that, the patient was shifted to Vijayanagar Hospital on the same day i.e., 21-05-2023 and discharged on 28-05-2023 and admitted in ICU and the history is road traffic accident. As per Ex.P.55 the MLC was registered in Vijayanagar Hospital and As per Ex.P.54 the police intimation was issued on 21/05/2023 itself. On perusal of Ex.P.3, P.50 and P.51 the police intimation and MLC extract, it appears that, the petitioner has been admitted in the Trustwell Hospital, Bengaluru on 28-05-2023 and history is road traffic accident and died on 31-05-2023. On perusal of Ex.P.49 the Inpatient Records with Discharge Summary of Trustwell Hospital, it appears that, the deceased was admitted in the said hospital on 28-12-2023 and died on 31-05-2023. Further on perusal of Ex.P.8 the PM Report issued by the Bowring and Lady Curzon Medical College and Research Institute, it appears SCCH-19 21 MVC.3788/2023 that, the history is road traffic accident. On perusal of these documents, it appears that, the deceased was admitted in the Vijayanagar Hospital and later shifted to Trustwell Hospital, Bengaluru from 21-05-2023 to 31-05-2023 for the injuries sustained in R.T.A and the medical records are entered on same day of the accident. The deceased was admitted in ICU at the hospital for the treatment and his father has filed the complaint. PW.1 has stated that, on the same day of the accident the police came and recorded the statement. On perusal of Ex.P.2, the first information, it appears that, filing of the information was delayed as deceased was admitted in the hospital and all are busy treatment of the deceased. Therefore, it appears that, the delay in filing FIR is properly explained.
34. On perusal of Ex.P.6-the Mahazar and Spot Sketch, it discloses that, the deceased was moving on his left side of the road, from Nethaji Park and the rider of the offending vehicle was coming in the opposite direction towards the Nethaji Park came extreme right side of the road and caused the accident. The deceased was moving at left side of the road, though there is sufficient space for moving the offending vehicle on its left side of the road, the rider of offending vehicle took his vehicle towards right side of SCCH-19 22 MVC.3788/2023 the road and dashed to the deceased and caused the accident.
35. On perusal of Ex.P.2 complaint, Ex.P.6 the spot mahazar with sketch, Ex.P.15 charge sheet, it appears that, the accident occurred near Rajanna Tea Shop, 3 rd Cross Road, Saneguruvanahalli, Bangalore-79, as the driver of the Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02/KG- 4693 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the deceased motorcycle and caused the accident. Further on perusal of Ex.P.12 and 13 i.e., notice U/Sec.133 of IMV Act and reply to the said notice, in the reply the owner of the vehicle/ respondent No.2 admitted that one Raju M S/o. Muttaiah A. was driving the vehicle on the date of alleged accident and he is having valid D.L. and insurance was in force on the date of accident. Further, on perusal of charge sheet, it discloses that, the Vijayanagar Traffic Police have filed the case against the driver of Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02/ KG-4693 for the offence punishable U/Sec.279 and 304(A) of IPC and Sec.134(a&b) & 187 of MV Act. The said charge sheet has not been challenged by the respondent No.2/owner of the offending vehicle. Therefore, it appears that, the said accident is caused by the offending Motorcycle. Further, there is no any SCCH-19 23 MVC.3788/2023 material to hold that, there is a contributory negligence on the part of the deceased.
36. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the decision reported in 2011 SAR(Civil) 319 Kausum and others V/s Satbir and others held that, in the petition for compensation U/Sec.166 of Motor Vehicles Act.1988 the petitioner has to prove the incident only on the preponderance of the probabilities and standard of proof beyond all reasonable doubt is not required.
37. After careful scrutiny of Ex.P.1-F.I.R. Ex.P.2- Complaint, Ex.P.3-Police Intimation, Ex.P.4-Re- complaint, Ex.P.5-copy of Requisition, Ex.P.6-Spot Mahazar with Sketch, Ex.P.7-Inquest Report, Ex.P.8- PM Report, Ex.P.9-IMV Report, Ex.P.12-Copy of Notice U/Sec.133 of IMV Act and Ex.P.13 Reply to the Notice U/Sec.133 of IMV Act and Ex.P.15-Charge Sheet, it appears that, as on the date of alleged accident, the rider of offending vehicle drove his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner, came at high speed and dashed to the deceased motorcycle and caused the accident. Therefore considering all these aspects, this Tribunal come to conclusion that, the said accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02/KG-4693. Accordingly Issue No.1 is answered in the affirmative.
SCCH-19 24 MVC.3788/202338. Issue No.2: The petitioners claimed compensation amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/- with respect to death of husband of petitioner No.1, father of petitioner No.2, son of petitioner No.3 and 4 and brother of petitioner No.5 and 6 in a road traffic accident.
39. As per Ex.P.16 and Ex.P.17 Notarized Copy of Aadhaar Card and PAN Card, date of birth of the deceased is shown as 12-02-1996. As per Ex.P.7 Inquest report and Ex.P.8 PM report, age of the deceased is shown as 27 years. This accident occurred in the year 2023. Hence, the age of the deceased is taken into consideration as 27 years at the time of accident, the age of the deceased is taken in between 26 to 30. Then the proper multiplier is 17.
40. The petitioners have contended that, at the time of accident, the deceased was working as a Sales and Service Technician at UrbanClap company Bangalore and running M.M. Enterprises and he was earning of Rs.75,000/-p.m. and contributing his entire earnings to maintain the family.
41. The petitioners have produced Ex.P.33 the visiting card of MM Enterprises and Ex.P.34 the bill receipts for the MM Enterprises. On perusal of Ex.P.34 the SCCH-19 25 MVC.3788/2023 cash bills, it appears that, the said bills are related to the year 2021 and 2022 and belonging to MM Enterprises for having sales and services. But, petitioners have not produced any other cogent material to show the income of the deceased through the said MM Enterprises. Therefore, Ex.P.33 and P.34 are not helpful to the case of the petitioners.
42. Further, in support to prove the income, the petitioners have produced the Ex.P.31 the Statement of earning of UC Urban Company, as per Ex.P.31 in March 2023 to May 2023 the total earning of the deceased is Rs.1,41,617/-, 1,23,411/- and Rs.47,908/- respectively and to Bank Transfer is of Rs.79,677.86, Rs.69,298.38 and Rs.26,676.64 respectively and it is stated that, earning on the platform represented gross transaction value excluding tax, payout by the platform represents money credited to an individual. Ex.P.32 is the Bank Statement of Kotak Mahindra Bank from February-2023 to May- 2023, on perusal of the said statement, the deceased was drawn the total income of Rs.25,305.60 for the month of February 2023, Rs.30,935.04 for the month of March 2023, Rs.28,892.22 for the month of April 2023 and Rs.21,118.52 for the month of May 2023.
SCCH-19 26 MVC.3788/202343. The employer of the said company is examined as PW.3 before the Court to prove the actual income and avocation of the deceased. PW.3 has deposed that the deceased Mr. Rohith M. was a Service Professional with UrbanClap Technologies India Ltd., as RO Repair Category and he is joined on 16-03-2022. He was not an employee in the company but an independent service professional as evident from the terms and conditions agreed upon between the service professional and the company. Accordingly no appointment letter or salary and its company was provides an insurance cover to all its Service Professionals through Acko General Insurance Ltd., and its insurance provider has duly disbursed an amount of INR 6,00,000/- along with INR 10,000/- as funeral expenses to the Mr. Rohith M. PW.3 in his cross-examination has deposed that, the salary of the deceased was based upon the commission. As per Ex.P.38 the earnings of the deceased have been given.
44. Ex.P.31 and Ex.P.38 are the statement of Gross earnings of the deceased issued by UrbanClap company, on perusal of the same there are deferences in the statement of earnings for each months in Ex.P.31 and P.38 itself. The earnings are varies in Ex.P.31 and P.38. Therefore, this Tribunal relied upon SCCH-19 27 MVC.3788/2023 the Ex.P.32 the Bank Statement of the deceased for considering the income. As per Ex.P.32, Rs.25,305.60 for the month of February 2023, Rs.30,935.04 for the month of March 2023, Rs.28,892.22 for the month of April 2023 and Rs.21,118.52 for the month of May 2023 was paid by the Urbanclap Company. Since, the accident was took place on 21-05-2023, the income of the month May 2023 have not been considered for calculating the income of the deceased. Since, the deceased has uncertain income, his immediate 3 months salary prior to the accident has been considered to determine the income of the deceased. The deceased has earned total income of Rs.85,132.86 in the months of February 2023 to April 2023. Therefore, the monthly salary of the deceased is calculated as under:
Rs.25,305.60+Rs.30,935.04+Rs.28,892.22=Rs.85,132.86 Which is rounded off to Rs.85,133/- Rs.85,133.00 / 3 = Rs.28,377.66 which is rounded off to Rs.28,378/- p.m. Therefore, this Tribunal by considering the above ratio, the income of the deceased has been taken at Rs.28,378/- p.m.
45. With regard to the loss of future prospectus is concern, the Apex court in the earlier Judgment SCCH-19 28 MVC.3788/2023 reported in 2013 ACJ 1403 (Rajesh & Ors Vs Rajbir Singh & Ors) also taken note of the fact that, self employed persons are also entitled for future prospectus and the said Judgment was referred to larger bench and the Apex court in the recent Judgment passed in 2017 ACJ 2700 SC (between National Insurance Co. Ltd., V/s Pranay Sethi and others.) "In case the deceased was self employed or on a fixed salary, an addition of 40% of the established income should be the warrant where the deceased was below the age of 40 year. An addition of 25% where the deceased was between the age of 40 to 50 years and 10% where the deceased was between the age of 50 to 60 years, should be regarded as the necessary method of computation. The established income means the income minus the tax component".
Herein this case, the deceased was aged about 27 years and Sales and Service Technician in Urban Clap Technologies Ltd., Bangalore, hence the petitioners are entitled to claim 40% of future prospectus as per above citation, due to death of the deceased in the road traffic accident.
46. The Petitioner No.1 is the wife of the deceased, petitioner No.2 is minor daughter, Petitioner No.3 and 4 are the parents and petitioner No.5 and 6 are the SCCH-19 29 MVC.3788/2023 sisters of the deceased. Hence, the petitioners are considered as dependents on the income of deceased. So, relying upon the decision reported in 2009 ACJ 1298 (Sarla Varma and others - Vs- Delhi Transport Corporation & another), out of the salary of the deceased 1/4th has to be deducted towards the personal expenses of the deceased.
a) Income of the deceased is taken at Rs. 28,378/-
b) Addition of 40% income towards future prospectus:
Rs. 39,729/-
Rs.28,378/- + 11,351/- (40%) =
c) Deduction towards personal
expenses:
Rs. 29,797/-
Rs.39,729/- - Rs.9,932/- (1/4th)
Therefore this tribunal took the monthly income of the deceased at Rs.29,797/-, which comes as under:-
Rs.29,797/- X 12 X 17 = Rs.60,78,588/-
Hence, the Petitioners are entitled for compensation of Rs.60,78,588/- under the head loss of dependency.
47. The Petitioner No.1 is the Wife of deceased, she lost her husband at the age of 23 years. Regarding SCCH-19 30 MVC.3788/2023 consortium, this tribunal has relied upon the decision reported in 2013 ACJ 1403, in which it is held as, "Words and phrases -Consortium -
Consortium is the right of spouse to the company, care, help, comfort, guidance, society, solace, affection and sexual relations with his or her mate".
Hence, it is not possible to compensate the loss of love and affection of the deceased with the Petitioner No.1 by compensating in quantum of amount. In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India passed in 2017 ACJ 2700 SC (between National Insurance co. ltd., V/s Pranay Sethi and others) held that, Reasonable figures on conventional heads, namely, loss of estate, loss of consortium and funeral expenses should be Rs.15,000/-, Rs.40,000/- and Rs.15,000/- respectively.
Therefore, in view of the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and by considering the loss of love, affection and care from her husband, this Tribunal awarded the reasonable compensation of Rs.40,000/- under the head Loss of Consortium.
48. The petitioner No.2 is the daughter and petitioner No.3 and 4 are the father and mother and petitioner No.5 and 6 are the unmarried younger sisters of the deceased, they lost love, affection and future support of SCCH-19 31 MVC.3788/2023 the deceased. In this regard the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India was held in the case of Magma General Insurance Co. ltd., V/s Nanu Ram @ Chuhru Ram & Ors., (Civil Appeal No.9581/2018 (Arising out of SLP (civil) 3192/2018) The Motor Vehicles Act is a beneficial legislation aimed at providing relief to the victims or their families, in cases of genuine claims. In case where a parent has lost their minor child, or unmarried son or daughter, the parents are entitled to be awarded loss of consortium under the head of Filial Consortium.
Parental consortium is awarded to children who lose their parents in motor vehicle accidents under the Act.
A few High courts have awarded compensation on this count. However, there was no clarity with respect to the principles on which compensation could be awarded on loss of Filial Consortium.
The amount of compensation to be awarded as consortium will be governed by the Principles of awarding compensation under "Loss of consortium" as laid down in Pranay Sethi (Supra).
In the present case, we deem it appropriate to award the father and the sister of the deceased, an amount of Rs.40,000/- each, for loss of Filial Consortium.
Hence, the petitioner No.2 to 6 are entitled for compensation amount at Rs.40,000/-each i.e., Total Rs.2,00,000/- under the head Loss of Filial Consortium.
SCCH-19 32 MVC.3788/202349. The petitioners have produced medical bills which is marked as Ex.P.28. As per the bills marked at Ex.P.28, the petitioners have spent Rs.4,81,355.11 towards medical expenses of the deceased. The respondents have not made out any grounds to disbelieve the medical bills. On perusal of the said medical bills and also considering the bills and also treatment given to the deceased in the hospital, the petitioner is entitled to claim the medical bills amount of Rs.4,81,355/- under the head of medical expenditure.
50. Towards awarding compensation under the head of transportation of dead body, funeral & obsequies ceremonies, the petitioners had not produced any documents. However, by considering the expenses towards funeral & obsequies ceremonies of deceased and in view of judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court passed in 2017 ACJ 2700 SC (between National Insurance co. ltd., V/s Pranay Sethi and others) it is just and proper to award a Rs.15,000/- under this head. Further the petitioners are also entitled for compensation of Rs.15,000/- under the head Loss of Estate.
SCCH-19 33 MVC.3788/202351. Considering oral evidence coupled with documentary evidence, it is just and proper to grant compensation as follows:
Under the Heads of: Amount
1. Loss of dependency Rs. 60,78,588/-
2. Loss of consortium Rs. 40,000/-
3. Towards loss of Rs. 2,00,000/-
Filial Consortium.
4. Towards Medical Expenses Rs. 4,81,355/-
5. Towards funeral and Rs. 15,000/-
obsequies ceremonies
6. Towards loss of estate Rs. 15,000/-
Total Rs. 68,29,943/-
The petitioners are entitled for total compensation of Rs.68,29,943/-, which is rounded off to Rs.68,30,000/-.
52. Interest:
For awarding interest, in MFA.No.103557/2016 (between Sriram General Insurance Co. ltd., V/s Smt. Lakshmi & others, dt:20-03-2018) the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, held that as per Sec.34 of CPC the rate of interest can be awarded in MVC Cases, cannot be more than 6% p.a. Hence, this Tribunal is of the opinion that, the petitioner is entitled for interest @6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of payment.SCCH-19 34 MVC.3788/2023
53. Liability:-
As per the petition, the Respondent No.1 is the Insurer and respondent No.2 is the RC Owner of the motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02/KG-4693. As already discussed in the Issue No.1 it is proved that, the accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding of the rider of the offending motorcycle. Hence, Respondent No.1 and 2 being Insurer and RC Owner of the offending motorcycle are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioners. Further, the Respondent No.1 is being Insurer of the offending vehicle has held liable to pay the compensation amount with interest to the petitioners. Accordingly, this Tribunal answered Issue No.2 Partly in the Affirmative.
54. Issue No.3:- For the foregoing reasons, this Tribunal proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER The claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act filed by the petitioners is hereby Partly allowed with cost.
The Petitioners are entitled for total compensation of Rs.68,30,000/- with interest @6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.
Respondent No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation SCCH-19 35 MVC.3788/2023 to the Petitioners. Further the Respondent No.1 being insurer of the offending vehicle is directed to deposit the compensation together with 6% interest within 60 days, from the date of this order.
Petitioner No.1 is entitled for compensation amount of Rs.29,30,000/-, Petitioner No.2 is entitled for Rs.12,00,000/-, Petitioner No.3 is entitled for Rs.5,00,000/-, petitioner No.4 is entitled for Rs.10,00,000/-, petitioner No.5 and 6 are entitled for Rs.6,00,000/-each with interest.
After deposit, out of awarded share compensation amount 50% each, with interest shall be released in favour of the Petitioner No.1 and 3 to 6 with proper identification and the remaining their share amount with interest shall be deposited in their names in FD in any nationalized bank, for a period of 03 years.
After deposit, the entire share with interest of petitioner No.2 shall be deposited in his name in FD in any nationalized bank till she attains the age of majority.
Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.1,000/-.
Draw the award accordingly.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer then corrected by me and pronounced in open court on this the 16th day of March 2026) Digitally signed by MOHAN MOHAN SADASHIV POL SADASHIV Date: (MOHAN SADASHIV POL) POL 2026.04.01 13:05:40 +0530 XV ASCJ & Member MACT, Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru.
SCCH-19 36 MVC.3788/2023ANNEXURE List of witnesses examined for Petitioners:
PW.1 : Sri. Muniswamy. PW.2 : Sri. Siddaraju. PW.3 : Sri. E. Umapathy. PW.4 : Dr. Kamalini Venkat. PW.5 : Sri. Mahesh K.N. PW.6 : Sri. Chandan D.A. PW.7 : Dr. Kiran J.
List of documents marked for Petitioners:
Ex.P.1 : Copy of F.I.R. Ex.P.2 : Copy of complaint. Ex.P.3 : Copy of Police Intimation. Ex.P.4 : Copy of statement. Ex.P.5 : Copy of requisition. Ex.P.6 : Copy of Mahazar with Spot Sketch. Ex.P.7 : Copy of Inquest Report. Ex.P.8 : Copy of PM Report. Ex.P.9 : Copy of IMV Report. Ex.P.10 : Copy of Letter.
Ex.P.11 : Copy of confession Statement. Ex.P.12 : Copy of Notice U/Sec.133 of IMV Act. Ex.P.13 : Copy of Reply to the Notice.
Ex.P.14 : Copy of Indemnity Bond.
Ex.P.15 : Copy of Charge Sheet.
Ex.P.16 : Copy of Aadhar Card of deceased.
SCCH-19 37 MVC.3788/2023Ex.P.17 : Copy of PAN Card of deceased. Ex.P.18 : Copy of LLR of the deceased.
Ex.P.19 to 24 : Copies of Aadhaar Cards of petitioner No.1 to 6.
Ex.P.25 : Discharge Summary.
Ex.P.26 : Estimation.
Ex.P.27 : IP Advance Receipt
Ex.P.28 : Medical Bills.
Ex.P.29 : Prescriptions.
Ex.P.30 : Copy of Birth Certificate
of petitioner No.2.
Ex.P.31 : Statement of earnings.
Ex.P.32 : Bank Statement.
Ex.P.33 : MM Enterprises Card.
Ex.P.34 : MM Enterprises 2 books.
Ex.P.35 : Copy of Aadhaar Card.
Ex.P.36 : Authorization Letter.
Ex.P.37 : Service agreement.
Ex.P.38 : Statement of earnings.
Ex.P.39 : Copy of statement.
Ex.P.40 to 46 : Hospital Documents.
Ex.P.47 : Copy of the Garage Receipt.
Ex.P.48 : Authorization Letter.
Ex.P.49 : Inpatient Records.
Ex.P.50 : Police Intimation.
Ex.P.51 : Copy of MLC Register.
Ex.P.52 : X-ray Films.
SCCH-19 38 MVC.3788/2023
Ex.P.53 : Authorization Letter.
Ex.P.54 : Police Intimation.
Ex.P.55 : Copy of MLC Register.
Ex.P.56 : Inpatient Records.
Ex.P.57 : X-ray Film.
List of Witnesses examined for Respondents:
RW.1 : Sri. Ramesh S. RW.2 : Sri. Suresh G.
List of Documents marked for Respondents:
Ex.R.1 : N/c of R.C. Card. Ex.R.2 : N/c of D.L. Ex.R.3 : Copy of Insurance Policy. Digitally signed by MOHAN MOHAN SADASHIV POL (MOHAN SADASHIV POL) SADASHIV POL Date: 2026.04.01 XV ASCJ & Member MACT, 13:05:49 +0530 Mayo Hall Unit, Bengaluru.