Rathnamma vs. G C Nataraj - Karnataka High Court, 07 January 2026

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:906 MFA No. 1593 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1593/2024 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. RATHNAMMA, W/O LATE NAGAPPA, @ NAGARAJAPPA N AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, 2. PALLAVI N D/O LATE NAGAPPA, @ NAGARAJAPPA N AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, 3. PAVITHRA N, D/O LATE NAGAPPA, @ NAGARAJAPPA N AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, 4. POOJA N, D/O LATE NAGAPPA, @ NAGARAJAPPA N AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, 5. MARUTHI N S/O LATE NAGAPPA, @ NAGARAJAPPA N AGED ABOUT 16 YEARS, APPELLANT NO.5 IS MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER APPELLANT NO.1, R/O ANABERU VILLAGE, DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT, NOW/ R/O C/O SUVARNAMMA Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court Of Karnatka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:906 MFA No. 1593 of 2024 W/O LATE LAKSHMANAPPA J C EXTENSION, HOLALKERE TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT -577 526 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. R SHASHIDHARA., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. G C NATARAJ, S/O G H CHANDRASHEKARAIAH, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OWNER OF THE LORRY BEARING NO. KA -05/D-8739 PRO. SRI. SIDDALINGESHWARA TRANSPORT J C ROAD, TUMAKURU 572 101. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., BRANCH OFFICE 25/1, 2nd FLOOR BUILDING, NO.2, SHANKARANAYANA BUILDING, RAHEJA TOWER, M.G ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2, V/O DATED 06.08.2024 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.03.08.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.723/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, HOLALKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:906 MFA No. 1593 of 2024

ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 03.08.2023 passed in MVC No.723/2022 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Holalkere, for enhancing the compensation.

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent No.

The ranks of the parties are retained as per tribunal for the sake of convenience.

One Nagappa alias Nagarajappa son of Ninjappa, met with an accident on 19.05.2022 and died on spot. Hence, his wife and children filed claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.60,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.23,10,750/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization.

Aggrieved by the said award, they preferred an appeal and mainly contented that Nagappa was doing civil HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:906 contract work and earning Rs.50,000/-. They also filed GST registration certificate in support of the same. But the Tribunal erred in taking his income as Rs.15,000/- per month. The amounts granted under other heads are meager. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation.

Learned counsel for respondent contended that the claimants filed only registration certificate in respect of GST of Nagappa, that shows that he was working as a contractor, but they have not filed even any bank statements to show his income. As such, the Tribunal rightly taken the notional income as per the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and it needs no interference.

The said Nagappa met with an accident on 19.05.2022. Though he stated that he was earning Rs.50,000/- per month, as a contractor he has not filed any document to prove his income. As per Ex.P16, he was a Civil Contractor and he met with an accident in the year HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:906 2022 and the notional income is to be taken as Rs.15,500/- per month. But considering his occupation and age 48 years, this Court finds it reasonable to take his income as Rs.20,000/- per month. The multiplier is to be taken as 13 and he is entitled for 25% towards future Others reported in (2017)16 SCC 680 case, 1/4th is to be deducted towards personal expenses. The loss of dependency comes to (Rs.20,000 + 25% x 12 x 13) - ¼ = Rs.29,25,000/-. The first petitioner is wife and she is entitled for Rs.44,000/- towards the spousal consortium. Also, petitioners No.2, 3, 4 and 5 are entitled for an amount of Rs.45,000/- by each of them towards parental consortium and all of them are entitled for Rs.33,000/- under the conventional heads.

Thus in all, components awarded by this court are as below, HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:906 Hence, the appellants-claimants are entitled for a total enhanced compensation of Rs.31,78,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., instead of Rs.23,10,750/- awarded by the tribunal.

In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part.

ii. The judgment and award dated 03.08.2023 passed in MVC No.723/2022 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Holalkere, is modified.

Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1 Loss of dependency 29,25,000 2 Spousal consortium 44,000 3 Towards loss of consortium 1,76,000 4 Towards other conventional heads 33,000

Total 31,78,000 HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:906 iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.31,78,000/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.23,10,750/- granted by the tribunal.

iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance company has already deposited the awarded amount,

hence respondent No.2 is directed to award the enhanced compensation of Rs.8,67,250/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., within one month from the date of this order.

v. On such deposit, petitioner No.1/wife of the deceased alone is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

AKV CT:NR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 81