Karnataka HC Rejects Parents’ Claim That Claimant Was Not Deceased’s Husband, Raises Fatal-Crash Award To ₹23.77 Lakh

On 21 December 2017, Sushmitha K.N. was killed when a lorry struck her scooter and ran over her shoulder.

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarded ₹13,70,000 with 6% interest.

Srinivasa Poojari appealed seeking enhancement.

The deceased’s parents, Prameela and Naganna, also appealed, disputing that Srinivasa was her husband and seeking enhancement.

The Tribunal had accepted Srinivasa’s evidence of the marriage, including the wedding card, marriage certificate, photographs and CD.

The appeals were brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

The Court applied the stated compensation-calculation principles for a 2017 accident: monthly income of ₹11,000, 40% addition for future prospects, a one-third deduction, and multiplier 18 to calculate loss of dependency.

It also retained the amounts awarded for consortium, loss of estate and funeral expenses.

The judgment names no specific precedent or further statutory provision; it refers to the income figure as being in accordance with “guidelines” and to the applicable position as “settled”.

The Court declined to disturb the finding that Srinivasa was the deceased’s husband because he had produced documentary and photographic evidence of the marriage, and cross-examination had not elicited material sufficient to discredit his evidence.

On quantum, it held that the Tribunal’s use of ₹8,000 as monthly income was contrary to the applicable guidelines and substituted ₹11,000.

Applying the stated future-prospects addition, deduction and multiplier, it recalculated loss of dependency at ₹22,17,600 and fixed total compensation at ₹23,77,600.

It allocated 30% of the enhanced compensation to the parents and 70% to Srinivasa, and directed the insurer to deposit the amount within eight weeks; failing that, the enhanced compensation would carry interest at 9%.