Karnataka High CourtTransport, Maritime, and Aviation LawCivil Law

Farmer’s Widow And Two Children Get ₹4.27 Lakh More As Karnataka HC Raises Accident Compensation To ₹23.9 Lakh

SMT. NETHRAVATHIv.THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

Farmer’s Widow And Two Children Get ₹4.27 Lakh More As Karnataka HC Raises Accident Compensation To ₹23.9 Lakh. SMT. NETHRAVATHI vs THE MANAGING DIRECTOR. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s income and the resulting award for loss of dependency required enhancement.

The court held

The High Court partly allowed the appeal and enhanced total compensation from Rs. 19,62,952 to Rs. 23,90,000.

It also directed

The claimants were awarded an additional Rs. 4,27,048, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realisation.

Respondent No. 2 was directed to deposit the enhanced amount with interest before the Tribunal within six weeks; the enhanced compensation was to be released to the claimants in the ratio 70:15:15.

01Facts

The claimants—the deceased Paramesh Gowda’s wife and two children—appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of compensation for his death in a road accident on 29 April 2023 involving a bus bearing registration No. KA-15-A-1988.

pp. 2–3

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded Rs. 19,62,952, including Rs. 19,19,952 for loss of dependency, and directed the insurer to pay.

p. 4

The claimants challenged the award as inadequate.

p. 4

02Issues

i.Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of the deceased’s income and the resulting award for loss of dependency required enhancement.

p. 5

ii.Whether the claimants were entitled to revised compensation under conventional heads, including consortium, loss of estate, and funeral expenses.

pp. 5–6

03Law Applied

The appeal was brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which provides for an appeal against an award of a Claims Tribunal.

p. 2

In assessing compensation, the Court applied the multiplier and future-prospects approach, accepted multiplier 13 for the deceased aged 48 and a 25% addition for future prospects.

p. 4

It relied on National Insurance Company v. Pranay Sethi, AIR 2017 SC 5157, to apply a 20% escalation to conventional heads, noting that the accident occurred more than six years after that decision.

p. 5

The Court also treated the 2023 notional income figure for an unskilled worker, Rs. 16,250 per month, as a reference point and considered the deceased’s agricultural occupation in fixing income.

p. 5

Provisions in the judgment · 1 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173

04Reasoning

The Tribunal had used a monthly income of Rs. 16,000 because no income proof was produced.

p. 5

The High Court considered RTC records showing six acres of land jointly held by the deceased, his brothers, and mother, which supported the conclusion that he was an agriculturist; it therefore fixed his monthly income at Rs. 17,000.

p. 5

Applying a one-third deduction for personal expenses, multiplier 13, and 25% future prospects, the Court calculated loss of dependency at Rs. 22,10,000.

p. 5

It awarded consortium of Rs. 48,000 to each of the three claimants and revised loss of estate and funeral expenses to Rs. 18,000 each, applying the 20% escalation.

pp. 5–6

It disallowed the separate Rs. 10,000 transportation award.

p. 6

05Holding

The High Court partly allowed the appeal and enhanced total compensation from Rs. 19,62,952 to Rs. 23,90,000.

pp. 6–7

The claimants were awarded an additional Rs. 4,27,048, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realisation.

p. 7

Respondent No. 2 was directed to deposit the enhanced amount with interest before the Tribunal within six weeks; the enhanced compensation was to be released to the claimants in the ratio 70:15:15.

p. 8
Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

SMT. NETHRAVATHIvsTHE MANAGING DIRECTOR

Karnataka High Court · October 27, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment