Karnataka High Court
Rupa And Anr vs Sandeep And Anr on 15 September, 2025
Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar
Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423
MFA No. 203020 of 2023
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
MISC. FIRST APPEAL NO.203020 OF 2023 (MV-D)
BETWEEN:
1. RUPA
W/O NAGARAJ,
AGE: 24 YEARS,
OCC: HOUSEHOLD,
2. NAGARAJ
S/O TUKARAM,
AGE: 27 YEARS,
OCC: LABOUR,
BOTH R/O: H.NO.90, JOGUR VILLAGE,
TQ: AND DIST: KALABURAGI.
...APPELLANTS
Digitally signed
by RENUKA
(BY SRI B.ALI MOHAMMAD, AND
Location: HIGH
COURT OF SRI SANJEEV PATIL, ADVOCATES)
KARNATAKA
AND:
1. SANDEEP
S/O SURESH JOSHI,
AGE: 45 YEARS,
OCC: OWNER OF TATA SUMO BEARING
REG.NO.M.H-50-A-7030,
R/O: A.P,TILAK HIGH SCHOOL ROAD,
KARAD, DISTRICT SATARA - 415 001.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423
MFA No. 203020 of 2023
HC-KAR
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY,
SENTURY COMPLEX, SUPER MARKET,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHARANABASAPPA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
V/O DATED 01.02.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO CALL THE RECORDS IN
MVC.NO.261/2021 ON THE FILE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND M.A.C.T., AT KALABURAGI AND THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.09.2022 CAUSED IN
MVC.NO.261/2021 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND M.A.C.T. AT KALABURAGI MAY BE MODIFIED AND
ENHANCING BY GRANTING COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED IN
THE CLAIM PETITION AND THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST
APPEAL MY BE ALLOWED AS PRAYED WITH COST, IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423
MFA No. 203020 of 2023
HC-KAR
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR
AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the appellants - claimants seeking enhancement of compensation as awarded in the judgment and award dated 07.09.2022 passed in MVC.No.261/2021 by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kalaburagi.
02. The facts leading to filing of claim petition are as under:-
That on 28.11.2019 at about 02.00 p.m. the appellants - claimants along with their minor son - Sharat were having their lunch near the Brick Bhatti, near Pingali village on Satara - Prandarapur road, at that time the Tata Sumo bearing Reg.No.MH-50-A-7030 came with high speed and dashed to their minor son - Sharat. He sustained grievous injuries, he was taken to Government Hospital and he has been declared as brought dead by the -4- NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423 MFA No. 203020 of 2023 HC-KAR doctor. The deceased - boy was stated to be 05 years and was a student. The parents of the deceased - boy have filed the claim petition. The Tribunal assessed the compensation and passed the impugned award.
03. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellants - claimants have filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation.
04. Heard learned counsel for the appellants - claimants and learned counsel for respondent No.2 - insurance company.
05. Learned counsel for the appellants - claimants would contend that the deceased was aged about 05 years and he had bright future. The compensation awarded is on lower side. He placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Thangavel and others vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, in Civil Appeal -5- NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423 MFA No. 203020 of 2023 HC-KAR No.3595/2024 decided on 08.08.2025, has contended that monthly income of Rs.5,000/- has to be taken of the child and multiplier to be applied at 15 based on the mother's age and the age of the mother was 22 years. With these, he prays to allow the appeal.
06. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 - insurance company would contended that in Kishan Gopal and another v. Lala and others reported in (2014) 1 SCC 244, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken the notional income of the deceased - child at Rs.30,000/- and considering the young age of parents namely mother who was about 36 years old has applied the multiplier 15 has to be taken into consideration. He further submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper.
07. For having heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent No.2 - insurance company, this Court perused the impugned judgment and other materials placed before the Court. -6-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423 MFA No. 203020 of 2023 HC-KAR
08. It is not in dispute that the son of the appellants - claimants aged 05 years died in a road traffic accident and also the liability of respondent No.2 - insurance company.
09. In the case of Kishan Gopal (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has taken notional income of the deceased at Rs.30,000/-. The said case came to be decided in the year 2014 and the claim petition pertains to the year 1993. In the case on hand, the accident has taken place in the year 2019. There is a gap of 26 years in between the accident in the case of Kishan Gopal (supra) and the present case.
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Thangavel (supra) has held as under:-
"5. There is no straight jacket formula as to the income to be adopted in the case of children when they suffer injuries or succumb to death, in a motor vehicle accident. In fact, the Tribunal had considered a Division Bench decision which adopted the income of Rs.5,000/- per month for -7- NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423 MFA No. 203020 of 2023 HC-KAR a 9-year old. The High Court does not give any reasoning to deviate from the said monthly income adopted by a Division Bench and merely adopts the income as per Schedule II. Schedule II is applied in cases where the claim is made under Section 163A of the Act, which proceeds on a 'no fault liability'. In the present case a claim under Section 166 of the Act was preferred and there was negligence found on the driver of the offending vehicle.
6. We are of the opinion that the monthly income of Rs.5,000/- as adopted for the child by the Tribunal is perfectly in order. There is no question of any deduction for personal expenses and hence even if the multiplier adopted is 15, considering the mother's age of 36, the total compensation for loss of dependency would be Rs.7,50,000/-, Rs.30,000 more than that awarded by the Tribunal. Insofar as the loss of love and affection is concerned, the Constitution Bench in Pranay Sethi [(2017) 16 SCC 680)] permits only Rs.40,000/- each and funeral expenses as rightly reduced by the High Court has to be Rs.15,000/. We find no rationale for the High Court to have deleted the -8- NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423 MFA No. 203020 of 2023 HC-KAR transportation expenses and loss of dress, ornaments and cycle. As rightly awarded by the High Court, loss of estate has to be compensated with Rs.15,000/-. Hence, even if just compensation of Rs.80,000 is fixed as loss of filial consortium as applicable to both the parents and the funeral expenses is reduced to Rs.15,000/-, the total compensation would be Rs.8,70,000/-."
11. In the said case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has taken the monthly income of the child at Rs.5,000/- and applied multiplier 15 considering the mother's age of 36 yeas. In the case on hand, the age of the mother is 22 years. Considering the said age, multiplier applicable is 18.
12. 1/3rd of the income has to be deducted towards personal expenses of the deceased - boy. In view of the same, the compensation for loss of dependency would be Rs.5,000/- x 12 x 18 = Rs.10,80,000/- x 2/3 = Rs.7,20,000/-.
-9-
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423 MFA No. 203020 of 2023 HC-KAR
13. The appellants - claimants being the parents are entitled to consortium in a sum of Rs.40,000/- each as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd vs. Pranay Sethi, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680.
14. The claimants are also entitled to funeral and transportation charges of Rs.15,000/- and towards loss of estate of Rs.15,000/-.
15. In view of he above, the total compensation is as under:-
Sl. Heads of Compensation
No. compensation awarded by this Court
1 Loss of dependency Rs.7,20,000/-
2 Loss of consortium Rs.80,000/-
3 Funeral and Rs.15,000/-
transportation charges
4 Loss of estate Rs.15,000/-
Total Rs.8,30,000/-
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423
MFA No. 203020 of 2023
HC-KAR
16. In view of the above, the appellants - claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.8,30,000/- as against Rs.4,70,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal.
17. The appellants - claimants are not entitled to interest for delay period of 210 days in filing the appeal, as per order dated 01.02.2025.
18. In view of the above, the following;
ORDER I. The appeal is allowed in part.
II. The appellants - claimants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.8,30,000/- as against Rs.4,70,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition, till its realization. III. The appellants - claimants are not entitled to interest for delay period of 210 days in filing the appeal.
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-K:5423 MFA No. 203020 of 2023 HC-KAR IV. The respondent No.2 - insurance company shall deposit the said award amount with interest before the Tribunal within 08 weeks from this day, failing which it is liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% p.a. V. The order of deposit as passed by the Tribunal is remained unaltered.
Sd/-
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE KJJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25 Ct:Vk