THE BRANCH MANAGER vs SMT RADHA K H
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62248
MFA No. 1550 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010140472025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 11 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 1550 OF 2025
(MV-D)
BETWEEN:
THE BRANCH MANAGER
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
CHIKKAMAGALURU BRANCH.
NOW REP BY THE MANAGER.
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
TH
No.28, 5 FLOOR, SOUTHERN PORTION EAST WING
CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD
BANGALORE-560 001.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI ASHOKA H, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI PRADEEP B, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. RADHA K H
W/O. LATE K.T. PRADEEPA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS.
2. MASTER K P MAHANTHESHA
S/O LATE K T PRADEEPA
AGED ABOUT 13 YEARS.
3. MASTER K P DHANUSH
S/O LATE K T PRADEEPA
AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS.
Digitally Signed By:
SHIVASHANKAR BASAPPA
AMARANNAVAR
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62248
MFA No. 1550 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010140472025
ND RD
SINCE 2 & 3 RESPONDENT ARE MINORS
WILL BE REPRESENTED BY THE N/G AND
MOTHER SMT. RADHA K H
4. K M THIMMAPPA
S/O LATE MALLAPPA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS.
ALL ARE R/O KEDIGERE VILLAGE
HIRENALLUR POST, HIRENALLUR HOBLI
KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT.
5. NAGARAJ. L.,
S/O. LAKSHMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
R/O. WARD No.11,
OPP TO T.M.C.
C.P.C. COLONY, KADUR TOWN
KADUR TALUK.
6. NAGARAJAPPA.B
S/O. BASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
R/O. BESIDE PARAMMASWAMY MUTT
GADIHALLI VILLAGE, TARIKERE TALUK.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI HARSHA G, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. SACHIN B S, ADVOCATE FOR R1-R4
R5 & R6- SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED
(R2 AND R3 MINOR REP. BY R1) )
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:21.12.2024
PASSED IN MVC No.163/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, KADUR, CHKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT,
AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.32,35,357/- WITH
INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION
TILL REALIZATION.
Digitally Signed By:
SHIVASHANKAR BASAPPA
AMARANNAVAR
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62248
MFA No. 1550 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010140472025
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed by the Insurer challenging
the judgment and award dated 21.12.2024 passed in MVC
No. 163/2020 by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kadur.
2. Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 – claimants made a
claim petition praying to award compensation for the
death of K.T. Pradeepa (husband of claimant No. 1, father
of claimant Nos. 2 and 3 and son of claimant No. 4) in a
road traffic accident that occurred on 30.01.2019 due to
the rash and negligent driving by the driver of
Autorickshaw bearing registration No. KA-66-1433. The
Tribunal after recording evidence, appreciating the
evidence on record, assessed the compensation and
awarded compensation under different heads as under:
Digitally Signed By:
SHIVASHANKAR BASAPPA
AMARANNAVAR
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62248
MFA No. 1550 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010140472025
1 Loss of dependency Rs.29,98,800/-
2 Loss of Estate Rs.18,000/-
3 Loss of Consortium Rs.1,92,000/-
4 Towards funeral and transport
Rs.18,000/-
expenses
5 Towards medical bills Rs.8,557/-
Total Rs.32,35,357/-
3. The Tribunal has also awarded interest at the
rate of 6% p.a. from date of petition till the date of
realization and directed appellant – Insurer (respondent
No. 3 before the Tribunal) to deposit the said award
amount with interest. Appellant – Insurer, challenging the
liability fastened on it and also challenging the quantum
of compensation awarded has filed the present appeal.
4. Heard learned counsel for appellant – Insurer
and learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 –
claimants.
5. Learned counsel for appellant – Insurer would
contend that the insured vehicle - Autorickshaw bearing
Digitally Signed By:
SHIVASHANKAR BASAPPA
AMARANNAVAR
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62248
MFA No. 1550 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010140472025
registration No. KA-66-1433 was not having permit to run
in Kadur taluk where the accident has occurred. Therefore,
there is violation of policy conditions and appellant –
Insurer is not liable to pay the compensation awarded. He
further submits that claimant No. 4 – father of the
deceased is aged about 55 years as on the date of
accident and he is not dependent on the deceased.
rd
Therefore, deduction is to be taken at 1/3 as against
th
1/4 taken by the Tribunal. With this, he prayed to allow
the appeal.
6. Learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4 –
claimants would contend that the insurer has not
established that there is no valid permit to ply the insured
vehicle in Kadur taluk. No such contention was taken in
the written statement filed by the Insurer. He further
contends that claimant No. 4 is the father of the deceased,
he is an aged person and was dependent on the deceased.
Considering the same, the Tribunal has rightly deducted
Digitally Signed By:
SHIVASHANKAR BASAPPA
AMARANNAVAR
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62248
MFA No. 1550 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010140472025
th
1/4 towards the personal expenses of the deceased. With
this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties the
Court has perused the judgment, award and trial Court
records.
8. The accident occurred on 30.01.2019 near
Thuruvanahalli Nirvanaswamy Mutt on Thuruvanahalli –
Hirenallur, NH-153 road. Learned counsel for appellant –
Insurer would contend that the accident occurred in Kadur
and there was not permit for the insured Autorickshaw
bearing registration No. KA-66-1433. Learned counsel for
appellant – Insurer would contend that the accident
occurred in Kadur and there was permit for the insured
Autorickshaw to ply in Kadur and in Ex.P.7 – Motor Vehicle
Accident Inspection Report, in column No. 8, it is
mentioned that the authority which had issued the permit
is ARTO, Tarikeren and it is not issued by transport
authorities of Kadur. R.W.1 – Officer of the appellant –
Digitally Signed By:
SHIVASHANKAR BASAPPA
AMARANNAVAR
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62248
MFA No. 1550 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010140472025
Insurer has stated in his evidence affidavit that the
Autorickshaw bearing registration No. KA-66-1433 had
permit to run in Tarikere taluk limits only and the accident
has taken in Kadur taluk and therefore there is violation of
permit conditions. On perusal of the objection statement
filed by the appellant – Insurer (respondent No. 3 before
the Tribunal) no such contention was taken. Therefore,
said evidence of R.W.1 is without any pleading. It is trite
law that, any evidence without pleading is no evidence.
More so, appellant – Insurer has not examined any of the
officials of the Road Transport Authority to establish that
the Autorickshaw had no permit to ply on the roads in
Kadur taluk. Therefore, said ground urged by the
appellant’s counsel has no basis at all and therefore, it is
rejected.
9. Claimant No.1 is the wife, claimant Nos.2 and 3
are minor children and claimant No. 4 is the father of the
deceased who was aged about 55 years as on the date of
accident. In claim petition there is no mention about
Digitally Signed By:
SHIVASHANKAR BASAPPA
AMARANNAVAR
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62248
MFA No. 1550 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010140472025
claimant No. 4 being dependent on the deceased. Even
P.W.1 (wife of the deceased) has not stated that claimant
No. 4 was dependent on the deceased. Considering the
said aspect claimant No. 4 was not dependent on the
deceased and only claimant Nos. 1 to 3 were dependents
on the deceased. Therefore, deduction is to be taken at
rd th
1/3 as against 1/4 taken by the Tribunal. The Tribunal
has taken the income of the deceased at Rs.14,000/- per
month and applied multiplier `17’. In view of the same,
loss of dependency is calculated as under:
14,000 X 12 = Rs.1,68,000/-
rd
1,68,000 – 1/3 = Rs.1,12,000/-
1,12,000 X 17 = 19,04,000/-
19,04,000 + 40% = Rs.26,65,600/-
10. Claimants are entitled to loss of dependency in
a sum of Rs.26,65,600/- as against Rs.29,98,800/-
awarded by the Tribunal. Consequently compensation is to
be reduced by Rs.3,33,200/-. In view of the same,
Digitally Signed By:
SHIVASHANKAR BASAPPA
AMARANNAVAR
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62248
MFA No. 1550 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010140472025
claimants are entitled to total compensation of
Rs.29,02,157/- (Rs.32,35,357 – Rs.3,33,200) with interest
at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date
of realization. Appellant – Insurer (respondent No. 3
before the Tribunal) is liable to pay the said compensation
amount with interest.
11. In view of the above, the following;
O R D E R
a. Appeal is allowed in part.
b. Claimants are entitled to total compensation of
Rs.29,02,157/- with interest at the rate of 6%
p.a. from the date of petition till the date of
realization.
c. Appellant – Insurer (respondent No.3 before the
Tribunal) shall deposit the compensation amount
with interest before the Tribunal within six weeks
from this day including the amount already
deposited.
Digitally Signed By:
SHIVASHANKAR BASAPPA
AMARANNAVAR
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:62248
MFA No. 1550 of 2025
CNR: KAHC010140472025
d. Amount in deposit is ordered to be transmitted
to the Tribunal.
e. Share of claimants in the compensation awarded
and order of deposit and release passed by the
Tribunal remain unaltered.
Digitally Signed By:
SHIVASHANKAR BASAPPA
AMARANNAVAR
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR)
JUDGE
LRS
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20
Ct.sm