UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., vs SMT. LAXMIBAI BASAPPA WALIKAR

- 1 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD

TH
DATED THIS THE 6 DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2026

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE USHARANI

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100905 OF 2021

(MV-D)

C/W

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100840 OF 2022

(MV-D)

IN MFA NO. 100905/2021
BETWEEN:

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
1568, MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER.

…APPELLANT

(BY SRI. R R MANE, ADVOCATE)

AND:
1. SMT. LAXMIBAI BASAPPA WALIKAR
AGE. ABOUT 53 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O. RAMPUR R.C., TQ. AND DIST. BAGALKOT.

2. MUTTAPPA S/O BASAPPA WALIKAR
AGE. ABOUT 19 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT
R/O. RAMPUR R.C., TQ. AND DIST. BAGALKOT.

3.
MARALASWAMI S/O BASAPPA WALIKAR
AGE. ABOUT 16 YEARS,
OCC. STUDENT, R/O. RAMPUR R.C.,
TQ. AND DIST. BAGALKOT.

(SINCE RESPONDENT NO.3 IS A MINOR,
HE IS REPRESENTED BY HIS

Digitally
signed by
YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR
Date:
2026.11.07
12:47:28
+0530
YASHAVANT
NARAYANKAR

- 2 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER
RESPONDENT NO.1 HEREIN)

4. CHANDRASHEKAR GOVINDAPPA KYADAGUMPI
AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. TRANSPORT BUSINESS AND
OWNER OF THE MINI GOODS VEHICLE
BEARING NO.KA-25/D-9820, R/O NO.249,
AT/POST. BIDNAL RURAL AREA,
ADAVI PLOT, PADMAGHATA STREET,
SHAKTI NAGAR, BASAVA NAGAR,
HUBBALLI-580028.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ANAND R. KOLLI, ADV. FOR R1 AND R2;
R3 MINOR REPRESENTED BY R1;
NOTICE TO R4 IF DISPENSED WITH)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES
ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS, ALLOW THIS
APPEAL BY REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION
GRANTED TO THE CLAIMANTS SUITABLY AND SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD 20.07.2020 PASSED BY THE
MEMBER, M.A.C.T. NO. III BAGALKOT, IN MVC NO. 176/2019
AND TO PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER OR ORDERS AS THIS
HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT UNDER THE FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, INCLUDING THE COSTS, IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

IN MFA NO. 100840/2022
BETWEEN:

1. SMT. LAXMIBAI BASAPPA WALIKAR
AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. HOUSEHOLD,
R/O. RAMAPUR R.C. TQ. AND DIST. BAGALKOT,
PIN-581701

2. MUTTAPPA S/O. BASAPPA WALIKAR
AGE. 19 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT,
R/O. RAMAPUR R.C. TQ. AND DIST. BAGALKOT,
PIN-581701

- 3 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

3.
MARALASWAMI S/O. BASAPPA WALIKAR
AGE. 16 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. RAMAPUR R.C., TQ.
AND DIST. BAGALKOT, PIN-581701
(SINCE PETITIONER 3 IS
MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MGM
PETITIONER NO.1)
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. ANAND R KOLLI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR GOVINDAPPA KYADAGUMPI
AGE. 51 YEARS, OCC. TRANSPORT BUSINESS AND
OWNER OF THE MINI GOODS VEHICLE
BEARING ITS NO.KA-25/D-9820
R/O. NO.249, AT POST. BIDNAL
RURAL AREA ADAVI PLOT, PADMIGHATA STREET,
HUBBALLI, PIN-580028

2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
MARUTI GALLI, BELGAUM, PIN-590001
...RESPONDENTS
(NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH;
SRI. R.R. MANE, ADV. FOR R2)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND
MODIFIED THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE
HON’BLE MEMBER M.A.C.T-III BAGALKOT AT BAGALKOT
DATED 20.07.2020 IN MVC NO. 176/2019 AND ALLOW THE
APPEAL, AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE.

THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON
02.11.2026 COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT,
THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE USHARANI

- 4 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

CAV JUDGMENT
MFA No.100840/2022 is filed by the claimants seeking
enhancement of compensation awarded in MVC No.176/2019
dated 20.07.2020 by the Member MACT-III, Bagalkot
(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for short) and MFA
No.100905/2021 is filed by the insurance company seeking to
reduce the compensation awarded in the aforesaid claim
petition.

2. The occurrence of accident and the liability fixed on
the Insurance Company are not in dispute. The Tribunal, after
appreciating oral and documentary evidence recorded a finding
that the driver of Mini Goods vehicle bearing registration
No.KA-25/D-9820 dashed into the bullock cart and caused
accident. Therefore, the Tribunal awarded compensation under
the following heads.
Head Amount in
(₹)
For loss of dependency 14,66,630/-
Loss of estate 15,000/-
Loss of consortium 40,000/-
Funeral expenses 15,000/-
Injuries sustained by the bullocks and damage 1,00,000/-
caused to the bullock cart.
Total 16,36,630/-

- 5 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

3. The learned counsel for claimants contended that
the Tribunal has not properly assessed the agricultural income
and fixed the annual income at ₹2,00,000/-, which is on a
lower side. Even the damage sustained to the bullock cart and
injuries suffered by the bullocks were not properly evaluated
and compensation towards the same fixed at ₹1,00,000/- is on
a lower side.

4. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company
contends that, the evidence adduced by the claimants show
that, now they are getting ₹1,50,000/- per annum from the
said land. Therefore, their income from the agricultural land
cannot be assessed as more than ₹1,50,000/- per annum.
Further, no documents have been produced to show what
exactly was the income earned from the agricultural land
owned by them. It is further contended that claimants have
claimed compensation of ₹50,000/- towards injuries to the
bullock and damage to the bullock cart, but Tribunal has
granted ₹1,00,000/- which is not permissible under law. In
support of the contention, learned counsel for the Insurance
Company has relied upon judgments in State of Haryana and

- 6 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

1
another Vs. Jasbir Kaur & Others and Surekha and
2
others Vs. Cargo Carriers India and others .

5. In the above judgment in the case of Jasbir Kaur,
Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that no materials were
placed, to prove the nature of the land and income derived
from the said land. There is possibility that claimants may be
required to engage persons to look after agriculture and hence,
Apex Court held that the normal rule about deprivation of
income is not strictly applicable to cases where agricultural
income is the source. Hence, considering the same towards
supervisory work, ₹3,000/- per acre was fixed in the year
2003. In the case of Surekha (referred supra) Division Bench
of this Court fixed ₹5,000/- towards supervision wherein 63
year old deceased was a retired pensioner, and land had
continued in the possession of claimants therein.

6. The learned counsel for the claimants has relied
upon judgment in the case of Shailaja and others vs. Pavan
3
Udupadi and another , wherein the deceased was an
advocate and income tax-payee. Hence, income from the
profession was considered along with supervision charges

1
2003 ACJ 1800 : (2003) 7 SCC 484 : AIR 2003 SC 3696
2
MFA No.200023/2019 (Kalaburgi Bench)
3
Civil Appeal No.840 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.18550/2023

- 7 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

₹3,000/- per acre for maintaining 3 acres of agricultural land
and totaled it to ₹10,000 per month for the entire extent.

7. In the present case, as per RTC/Ex.P8, deceased is
the owner of land bearing Sy.No.122/1 measuring 11 Acres 5
Guntas of Seetimani Hobli, Nayanegali Village, Bagalakot Taluk
and at Column 9 of the RTC, it is recorded that Sunflower has
been grown and the said land is a dry land. Further, in the
complaint-Ex.P2 lodged by one Yamanappa Nijappa Valikar,
cousin of the deceased, it is stated that as per his daily routine,
the deceased went to attend agricultural operations taking the
bullock cart. Hence, it is important to extract the said portion of
Ex.P2, which reads as under:
“£ÀªÀÄä PÁPÁ §¸À¥Àà EvÀ£ÀÄ MPÀÌ®ÄvÀ£À PÉ®¸À ªÀiÁrPÉÆAqÀÄ EzÀÄÝ,
¢£Á®Ä JwÛ£À§Ar ºÀÄrPÉÆAqÀÄ UÀ¼É ºÉÆqÉAiÀÄ®Ä ºÉÆ®PÉÌ ºÉÆÃV
§gÀÄªÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß ªÀiÁqÀÄwÛzÀÝ£ÀÄ. . . .
F ¢ªÀ¸À ¢£ÁAPÀ 30/06/2018 gÀAzÀÄ JwÛ£À §Ar ºÀÄrPÉÆAqÀÄ
¢£ÀzÀAvÉ ºÉÆ®PÉÌ UÀ¼É ºÉÆqÉAiÀÄ®Ä ºÉÆÃzÀ£ÀÄ ªÀÄÄAzÉ MAzÀªÀgÉ
vÁ¹£À ªÉÄÃ¯É £À£ÀUÉ ¥ÀjZÀAiÀÄ¸ÀÜgÁzÀ £ÁAiÀÄ£ÉÃUÀ° UÁæªÀÄzÀ ¥ÀgÀ¸À¥Àà
NH 50
©üÃªÀÄ¥Àà ºÁ®ªÀgÀ EªÀgÀÄ £À£ÀUÉ ¥sÉÆÃ£ï ªÀiÁr gÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ
ªÉÄÃ¯É ¤ªÀÄä PÁPÁ §¸À¥Àà EvÀ£À JwÛ£À §ArUÉ M§â ¯Áj qÉæöÊªÀígÀ
ºÁ¬Ä¹ JPÉìAmï ªÀiÁqÁåt ¤ªÀÄä PÁPÁ §¸À¥Àà ¸ÀÜ¼ÀzÀ¯ÉèÃ
wÃjPÉÆArzÁÝ£É. ¤ªÀÅ ¨ÉUÀ£É §j CAvÁ ¸ÀÄ¢Ý w½¹zÀ£ÀÄ. £Á£ÀÆ
UÁ§jAiÀiÁV F ¸ÀÄ¢ÝAiÀÄ£ÀÄß £ÀªÀÄä ªÀÄ£ÉAiÀÄ°è w½¹ £Á£ÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ

- 8 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

£ÀªÀÄä NtÂAiÀÄ 1) gÀÄzÀæUËqÀ ©üªÀÄ£ÀUËqÀ UËqÀgÀ, 2) ºÀtªÀÄAvÀ
®PÀëöät UÀÄAqÀUÉÃj ºÁUÀÆ ¹zÀÝ¥Àà ªÀÄ®è¥Àà zÀ¼ÀªÁ¬Ä F ¥ÀæPÁgÀ £ÁªÀÅ
£Á®ÄÌ d£ÀgÀÄ PÀÆrPÉÆAqÀ £ÀªÀÄä £ÀªÀÄä ¸ÉÊPÀ®ªÉÆlgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É WÀl£Á
¸ÀÜ¼ÀPÉÌ ºÉÆÃV £ÉÆÃqÀ®Ä £ÀªÀÄä PÁPÁ §¸À¥Àà FvÀ£ÀÄ qÁA§gÀ gÀ¸ÉÛAiÀÄ
¥ÀÆªÀðzÀ §¢AiÀÄ°è ©zÀÄzÀÄÝ vÀ¯É¬ÄAzÀ ¨Á¬ÄAzÀ ªÀÄÆV¤AzÀ
Q«¬ÄAzÀ gÀPÀÛ¸ÁæªÀªÁV ¨sÁj WÁAiÀÄ ¥ÉmÁÖVzÀÄÝ ¸ÀÜ¼ÀzÀ°è ªÀÄgÀt
ºÉÆA¢zÀÄÝ JwÛ£À §Ar ¸Àé®à ªÀÄÄAzÉ ºÉÆÃV ¥À°ÖAiÀiÁV ©¢ÝvÀÄÛ
JgÀqÀÄ JvÀÄÛUÀ½UÉ UÁAiÀÄ ¥ÉmÁÖV gÀPÀÛ¸ÁæªÀªÁVzÀÄÝ £ÉÆrzÉªÀÅ.

8. Complaint was lodged on the same day of the
incident. Hence, it is clear that the said complaint was not an
afterthought. Even from the evidence of PW1, wife of the
deceased, it is clear that they were living on the agricultural
income of the deceased. PW1 has also deposed that they used
to get an income of ₹5,00,000/- per year, but after the death
of her husband, they have given it on lease (Lavani), from
which they are getting only ₹1,50,000/- per year and hence
they are facing financial crisis and she is unable to provide
education to her children.

9. Most important aspect that has to be taken note of
is, bullock carts in rural areas will be used only for carrying out
agricultural operations and at the time of the accident,
deceased was taking bullock cart to his agricultural lands.

- 9 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

Hence, it is crystal clear that deceased was carrying on
agricultural operations/supervision.

10. It is pertinent to note here that, even if the
argument of learned counsel for the Insurance Company is
considered and ₹1,50,000/- is deducted from ₹5,00,000/-, i.e.,
the income said to have been derived from 11 acre 5 guntas of
land, then there is loss of ₹3,50,000/- per annum, to the
claimants. In the alternative, if afore-referred judgments in the
cases of Jasbir Kaur and Surekha are taken into
consideration, in the year 2003 itself a sum of ₹3,000/- per
acre of agricultural land had been fixed towards supervision
charges and if 10% of enhancement is given to the said income
once in every three years, it comes to ₹5,846/- per acre, which
in this case shall be multiplied into 11, i.e., for 11 acres of land,
which comes to ₹64,306/- per month.

11. Considering both the calculations, I am of the
considered view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
is on a lower side and it would be just and appropriate if it is
fixed as ₹25,000/- per month. Since there are three
rd
dependents, 1/3 of the same is deducted from yearly income
and it comes to ₹2,00,000/- per annum. Upon considering age

- 10 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

of the deceased, if multiplier 11 is applied, it comes to
₹22,00,000/- towards ‘loss of dependency’. Further, having
regard to the ratio laid down in National Insurance Company
4
Limited v. Pranay Sethi and another , compensation
awarded by the Tribunal towards conventional heads i.e.,
towards ‘loss of consortium’, ‘loss of estate’ and ‘funeral
expenses’, are modified as ₹19,965, ₹53,240/- and ₹19,965/-
respectively .

12. Further, keeping in view the principles laid down in
the case of Ramla vs. National Insurance Company
5
Limited and after considering the facts and circumstances of
the case, Tribunal has rightly awarded global compensation of
₹1,00,000/- towards the damage to bullock cart and injuries to
Bullocks. The circumstances of this case that warrants awarding
compensation under this head is that the injuries sustained
would have taken considerable time to heal, during which the
agricultural operations would have been adversely affected. In
order to replace the damaged bullock cart, the claimants herein
would have incurred substantial expenditure. Therefore, same
warrants no interference.

4
2017 (16) SCC 680
5
2019 (2) SCC 192

- 11 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

Head Amount in
(₹)
Loss of dependency 22,00,000/-
Loss of consortium (₹53,240/- x 3) 1,59,720/-
Loss of estate 19,965/-
Loss of funeral expenses 19,965/-
Injuries sustained by the bullocks and damage 1,00,000/-
caused to the bullock cart.
Total 24,99,650/-
Rounded off 25,00,000/-

13. One more contention raised is with regard to the
fixation of interest at the rate of 6% by the Tribunal. It is
important to note here the case of Puttamma and others Vs.
6
K.L. Narayana Reddy and Another , wherein the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has held that relevant factors such as inflation,
changes in the economy and the policy being adopted by the
Reserve Bank of India are required to be considered while
awarding interest. Further, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
7
United India Insurance Company V/s Malyadari , has
opined that awarding interest at the rate of 9% per annum is
more appropriate in cases involving death and serious injuries.
Accordingly, the enhanced compensation shall also carry
interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition
till realization.

6
(2013)15 SCC 45
7

MFA 3895/2018

- 12 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

14. In view of the above discussions, I proceed to pass
the following:
ORDER

(i) The appeal in MFA No.100840/2022 is partly
allowed .

(ii) The appeal in MFA No.100905/2021 is
dismissed .

(iii) Consequently, judgment and award passed in
MVC No.176/2019 is modified only to the
extent of compensation amount and awarded
₹25,00,000/-, which shall carry interest at the
rate of 9% per annum from the date of
petition till realization.

(iv) United India Insurance Company shall deposit
the entire compensation, together with
accrued interest, before the jurisdictional
Tribunal within a period of eight weeks from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
judgment.

- 13 -
MFA No. 100905 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 100840 of 2022

(v) The Registry shall transmit the amount in
deposit, if any, made by the Insurance
Company along with Trial Court Records to the
concerned Tribunal forthwith.

(vi) Registry to draw modified award.

Sd/-
(USHARANI)
JUDGE

YAN
CT:CNB