Karnataka High CourtTransport, Maritime, and Aviation LawCivil Law

Karnataka HC Raises Widow’s Compensation To ₹12.67 Lakh, Finds BMTC Bus Driver 90% Negligent in Fatal Crash

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER B M T Cv.SMT. ANJEER PATIL

Karnataka HC Raises Widow’s Compensation To ₹12.67 Lakh, Finds BMTC Bus Driver 90% Negligent in Fatal Crash. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER B M T C vs SMT. ANJEER PATIL. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in attributing 50% contributory negligence to the deceased

The court held

The Court partly allowed both appeals.

It also directed

It assessed total compensation at Rs.14,36,600, deducted 10% for the deceased’s contributory negligence and Rs.25,000 interim compensation, and fixed the amount payable at Rs.12,67,940—an enhancement of Rs.4,95,190 over the Tribunal’s award.

BMTC was directed to deposit the enhanced amount with 6% interest per annum within six weeks; the claimant was denied interest for the 186-day delay in filing her appeal, and 50% of the enhanced amount was directed to be released, with the balance placed in a five-year fixed deposit.

01Facts

The claimant sought compensation for the death of her husband, Kamalakar Indrajit Patil, in a road accident involving a BMTC bus on 16 January 2022.

pp. 5–6

The Tribunal assessed compensation at Rs.15,95,500, attributed 50% contributory negligence to the deceased, deducted Rs.25,000 interim compensation, and awarded Rs.7,72,750 with interest at 6% per annum.

pp. 5–6

BMTC appealed, challenging the negligence finding and the amount of compensation; the claimant appealed, disputing contributory negligence and seeking enhanced compensation.

pp. 6–9

02Issues

i.1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in attributing 50% contributory negligence to the deceased

p. 9

ii.2. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was just and proper

p. 9

03Law Applied

The appeals were brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which provides for appeals from awards of a Claims Tribunal.

pp. 2–4

In assessing compensation, the Court applied the multiplier method, taking account of the deceased’s income, future prospects, personal-expense deduction and age; it also considered the conventional heads of consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses.

pp. 12–14

The Court treated contributory negligence as requiring apportionment of the compensation according to the respective responsibility of the deceased and the bus driver.

p. 11

No specific precedent is cited in the judgment.

Provisions in the judgment · 2 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Section 173

Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 279

04Reasoning

The spot sketch, photographs and driver’s evidence showed that the deceased was on the road beside a divider, where there was no pedestrian crossing or footpath.

pp. 10–11

The Court therefore found some negligence on the deceased’s part, but held that the bus driver should have taken greater care while turning and should have braked if a pedestrian entered the road; it reduced the deceased’s contributory negligence from 50% to 10%.

pp. 10–11

On compensation, the Court accepted age 59 and multiplier 9, but revised monthly notional income from Rs.15,000 to Rs.15,500, retained 10% future prospects, and applied a one-third deduction because the three daughters were married and not dependants.

pp. 11–13

It upheld consortium of Rs.1,76,000, loss of estate and funeral expenses, but removed the separate award for loss of love and affection to avoid awarding both heads.

p. 14

05Holding

The Court partly allowed both appeals.

pp. 14–15

It assessed total compensation at Rs.14,36,600, deducted 10% for the deceased’s contributory negligence and Rs.25,000 interim compensation, and fixed the amount payable at Rs.12,67,940—an enhancement of Rs.4,95,190 over the Tribunal’s award.

pp. 14–15

BMTC was directed to deposit the enhanced amount with 6% interest per annum within six weeks; the claimant was denied interest for the 186-day delay in filing her appeal, and 50% of the enhanced amount was directed to be released, with the balance placed in a five-year fixed deposit.

pp. 15–16
Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER B M T CvsSMT. ANJEER PATIL

Karnataka High Court · October 30, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment