Karnataka High CourtTransport, Maritime, and Aviation LawCivil Law

Karnataka HC Doubles Consortium Award To Rs 80,000 For Accident Victim’s Wife And Daughter

SMT PUSHPALATHA B Rv.SRI DHANANJAYA K S

Karnataka HC Doubles Consortium Award To Rs 80,000 For Accident Victim’s Wife And Daughter. SMT PUSHPALATHA B R vs SRI DHANANJAYA K S. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the Tribunal correctly assessed the deceased’s age as 46 years, rather than 44 years, for determining compensation

The court held

The appeal was allowed in part.

It also directed

The claimants were awarded an additional ₹40,000, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization.

The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced amount within six weeks, and the claimants were entitled to its release in equal shares.

Interest was excluded for the 1,531-day delay in filing the appeal.

01Facts

The claimants, the deceased’s wife and daughter, sought compensation for his death in a road accident on 18 November 2017.

¶ 1–3, 5–6, 9, 11

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded ₹25,94,392, including ₹40,000 for consortium, with interest at 6% per annum.

¶ 1–3, 5–6, 9, 11

The claimants appealed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement.

¶ 1–3, 5–6, 9, 11

They challenged the age adopted for the deceased, sought inclusion of agricultural income, and claimed consortium for both claimants.

¶ 1–3, 5–6, 9, 11

02Issues

i.1. Whether the Tribunal correctly assessed the deceased’s age as 46 years, rather than 44 years, for determining compensation

¶ 5–8

ii.2. Whether income from the deceased’s agricultural lands should be added to his salary income when calculating compensation

¶ 9–10

iii.3. Whether both claimants were entitled to consortium, and whether the Tribunal’s award under that head should be enhanced

¶ 11

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

The Court applied the compensatory principles governing motor-accident awards, including assessment of dependency and conventional heads of compensation.

It held that consortium was payable to each claimant at ₹40,000 in this case.

¶ 11

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

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173

04Reasoning

The Court upheld the Tribunal’s reliance on the deceased’s Aadhaar card for his age, reasoning that the ages recorded in the inquest mahazar and post-mortem report were based on police documents and lacked proof of date of birth.

¶ 7–8

It declined to add agricultural income because the lands remained with the claimants after the deceased’s death and, as a full-time employee, he could not contribute his own services to generating that income.

¶ 10

However, it found that both claimants were entitled to consortium of ₹40,000 each, increasing that head from ₹40,000 to ₹80,000.

¶ 11

It otherwise left the Tribunal’s awards for funeral expenses and loss of estate undisturbed.

¶ 12

05Holding

The appeal was allowed in part.

¶ 13–14

The claimants were awarded an additional ₹40,000, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization.

¶ 13–14

The insurer was directed to deposit the enhanced amount within six weeks, and the claimants were entitled to its release in equal shares.

¶ 13–14

Interest was excluded for the 1,531-day delay in filing the appeal.

¶ 13–14
Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

SMT PUSHPALATHA B RvsSRI DHANANJAYA K S

Karnataka High Court · November 11, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment