The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10251 MFA No. 1163 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1163 OF 2023(MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. YALLAVVA KUMAR KANDLI @ YALLAVVA, W/O LATE KUMAR KANDLI, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS. 2. SUDEEP KUMAR KANDLI @ SUDEEP, S/O LATE KUMAR KANDLI @ KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS. 3. SEVANTHI KUMAR KANDLI @ SEVANTHI S/O LATE KUMAR KANDLI @ KUMAR AGED ABOUT 15 YEARS. 2ND AND 3 APPELLANTS MINOR GUARDIAN MOTHER APPELLANT NO.1, SMT. YALLAVVA KUMAR KANDLI, ALL ARE R/AT KORAVARA ONI, TADASA VILLAGE, SHIGGAVI TALUK, HAVERI DISTRICT, PRESENTLY R/AT SRINAGARA, BEHIND JAIL, HASSAN CITY, HASSAN -573 201. Digitally signed by CHAITHRA P Location: High Court of Karnataka
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. KAVITHA H.C., ADVOCATE) …APPELLANTS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10251 MFA No. 1163 of 2023 AND: 1. RAMESH D.H. S/O HANUMEGOWDA, DABBE VILLAGE AND POST, KASABA HOBLI, BELUR TALUK, HASSAN 573 201. 2. MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, 2ND FLOOR, KRUTHIKA ARCADE, N.R. CIRCLE, HASSAN -573 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.C. BETSUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; V/O/D 07.02.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.11.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO. 940/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, HASSAN, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10251 MFA No. 1163 of 2023 ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants challenging the judgment and award dated 05.11.2022 passed in MVC No.940/2021 by Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT., Hassan (for short 'the tribunal'). This appeal is founded on the premise of inadequate and meagre compensation awarded by the tribunal. Consequently, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are as under:- On 01.09.2020, one person by name Kumar Kandli @ Kumar Sangappa Kandli along with his father-in-law was proceeding as a pedestrian towards the Belur bus stop. After completion of his work, when they reached near Neharu Nagara Circle, Belur Town and while crossing the road, at that time, a Car bearing registration No. KA-46-M- - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10251 MFA No. 1163 of 2023 1318 came from Chikkamagaluru side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against Kumar Sangappa Kandli, as a result of which, Kumar Sangappa Kandli @ Kumar Kandli sustained severe head injuries and he was shifted to nearby Belur Government Hospital and thereafter, to the Government Hospital at Hassan then again he was shifted to NIMHANS Hopsital, Bengaluru and again to KIMS Hospital at Hubli and thereafter, the said Kumar Sangappa Kandli was discharged from the hospital as he was in the stage of Coma and there was no improvement and he was confined to bed at his house. However unfortunately, he succumbed to the injuries on 27.11.2020 while undergoing treatment. 4. In view of the sudden and unfortunate death of the deceased, claimants, who are the wife and minor children filed claim petition seeking compensation against the respondents, owner of the offending vehicle and the Insurance Company. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10251 MFA No. 1163 of 2023 5. Upon appearance, respondents filed the statement of objections, denied the claim, sought for dismissal of the claim petition. 6. On the basis of materials placed on record both oral and documentary, the tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.19,82,923/- along with interest at 6% per annum, fixed the liability jointly against respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and directed respondent No.2 to pay the compensation within one month from the date of the order. 7. Being dissatisfied by the inadequate compensation awarded, the appellants are before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. 8. It is a vehement contention of learned counsel for the appellants and the tribunal has awarded inadequate compensation. The tribunal has failed to take the correct income of deceased for computing compensation. On these grounds, she seeks enhancement. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10251 MFA No. 1163 of 2023 9. Per-contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2-Insurance Company sustains the order contends that the compensation awarded is just and reasonable and there is no requirement of enhancement as no material is placed on record with regard to the proof of income of deceased. 10. I have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents. The occurrence of accident, involvement of the vehicle, injuries sustained in the road traffic accident leading to the death are all proved by production of Exs.P-1 to P-21. The appellants being the dependants and legal heirs of deceased is not in dispute. Negligence is rightly attributed against the driver of the offending vehicle. 11. Now, coming to the question of age, avocation, income, multiplier for awarding compensation, it is seen that the deceased was aged 40 years as on date of occurrence of accident. The appropriate multiplier would be '15' which is correctly taken, does not call for - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:10251 MFA No. 1163 of 2023 interference. 25% is added towards future prospects by the tribunal which also does not call for interference. Income is taken by the tribunal at Rs.12,500/- whereas, as per the notional income chart provided by the Legal Services Authority, income is required to be taken at Rs.14,500/- for the year 2020. Accordingly, income is taken at Rs.14,500/-. As there are 3 dependents, 1/3rd is deducted towards personal and living expenses which also does not call for interference. Therefore, the loss of dependency Rs.21,74,940/-, in view of the modified income would be (Rs.14,500/- + 25% = Rs.18,125/- - 1/3rd = Rs.12,083/- x 12 x 15) as against Rs.19,82,923/-. 12. Towards loss of consortium, tribunal has awarded Rs.40,000/- only for one person which is erroneous. In view of the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited -vs- Pranay Sethi each of the dependant would be entitled to Rs.40,000/- per person. Hence (40,000 x 3) Rs.1,20,000/- is awarded under this head. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:10251 MFA No. 1163 of 2023 13. They shall also be entitled to 10% escalation. Therefore, addition of Rs.12,000/- is added to this amount. Towards loss of estate Rs.15,000/- and funeral expense Rs.15,000/- is retained. Towards medical expenses Rs.37,863/- is retained. 14. In view of the discussions made herein above, the claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.23,74,803/- as against Rs.19,82,923/-. Accordingly, I pass the following:
Decision
ORDER i) The appeal is allowed-in-part; ii) The judgment and award dated 05.11.2022 passed in MVC No.940/2021 by Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Hassan is modified; iii) The claimants would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.23,74,803/- along with - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:10251 MFA No. 1163 of 2023 interest at 6% per annum as against Rs.19,82,923/-; iv) The enhanced compensation amount shall be paid by the respondent No.2-Insurance Company within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; v) The compensation amount shall be released in favour of the claimants, upon proper verification; vi) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal with regard to apportionment, release and deposit are retained. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40 CT:SNN