Karnataka High Court
Transport, Maritime, and Aviation LawCivil Law

The deceased motorist’s failure to exercise due care warranted a 10% contributory-negligence deduction.

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR vs SMT KAVYA D N

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: September 11, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
The deceased motorist’s failure to exercise due care warranted a 10% contributory-negligence deduction.. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR vs SMT KAVYA D N. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The claimants—the deceased’s wife, minor son and parents—sought compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act after Tharamurthy died in a collision involving his scooter and a BMTC bus on 11 September 2021.

Source reference: p. 3–6

They alleged that the bus struck the scooter from behind; BMTC contended that the deceased lost control while attempting to overtake the bus and fell beneath its rear wheel.

Source reference: p. 3–6

The Tribunal found the bus driver negligent and awarded Rs.43,04,312, with interest at 6% per annum.

Source reference: p. 10–11

BMTC appealed, challenging the finding on negligence and the quantum of compensation.

Source reference: p. 11–13
02

Issues

Whether the Tribunal erred in finding the BMTC bus driver negligent and whether contributory negligence should be attributed to the deceased.

Source reference: p. 11–14

Whether the Tribunal’s assessment of compensation required interference.

Source reference: p. 12–13, 15
03

Law Applied

The claim was brought under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, and the appeal was brought under Section 173(1).

Source reference: p. 2, 4

On compensation, the Tribunal had relied on National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi, which sets out principles for adding future prospects, and Hem Raj v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., which holds that future prospects may be awarded even where income is assessed by estimation.

Source reference: p. 9
04

Reasoning

The court upheld the Tribunal’s finding that the BMTC driver was negligent, but considered that the circumstances—including how the deceased came into contact with the bus and his attempt to overtake it—also warranted attributing some responsibility to him. It therefore fixed contributory negligence at 10%.

Source reference: p. 13–14

The court rejected the challenge to the compensation assessment, leaving the Tribunal’s findings on income, multiplier and other heads undisturbed.

Source reference: p. 15

Applying the 10% reduction to the Tribunal’s award of Rs.43,04,312, the court calculated compensation payable at Rs.38,73,881 after rounding.

Source reference: p. 14–15
05

Holding

The appeal was allowed in part. The award was modified from Rs.43,04,312 to Rs.38,73,881 solely to reflect 10% contributory negligence attributed to the deceased.

The modified compensation carries interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realization; the Tribunal’s remaining directions were left undisturbed.

Source reference: p. 15
06

Acts & Sections Cited

2 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Motor Vehicles Act, 19882

Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

THE MANAGING DIRECTORvsSMT KAVYA D N

Karnataka High Court · September 11, 2026

Click to open original judgment

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

Click to open original judgment