The court increased compensation due to improper income assessment and clarified apportionment ratios in fatal accident claims.

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) MFA No.100634/2020 is filed by the parents of the deceased, MFA Crob No.100055/2020 is filed by the wife of the deceased and MFA No.100833/2020 is filed by the insurance company challenging the quantum of compensation awarded under judgment and award dated 4.10.2019 passed in MVC No.203/2017 on the file of learned MACT-III, Ballari, [For short, ‘Tribunal’]

2. Brief facts giving rise to filing of these appeals are that wife of the deceased Swaroop Mahadevayya filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act , 1988 claiming compensation on the ground that her husband Swaroop met with road accident on 3.3.2017 due to rash and negligent driving of the Tata Sumo Vehicle Bearing registration No.KA-01-AB-7748 by its driver. It is averred that the deceased was aged 31 years at the time of the accident, was a Software Engineer working in Bristlecone MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 HC-KAR India Limited and drawing a salary of Rs.18,33,348/- per annum.

3. The respondents appeared and filed a detailed written statement denying the entire averments made in the claim petition, including the age, avocation and income of the deceased and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.

4. The Tribunal recorded the evidence of the parties.

On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,12,01,360/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization, directing the insurance company to make good the compensation. Aggrieved by the same, the parents, wife and the insurance company are before this Court challenging the quantum of compensation.

5. Learned counsel Sri.V.S. Kalasurmath appearing for the appellants-parents of the deceased and Sri. Praveen Tarikar, learned counsel appearing for the cross- objector/wife of the deceased would support the impugned MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 HC-KAR judgment and award of the Tribunal insofar as finding with regard to the negligence and liability is concerned. It is submitted that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate Ex.P9- Salary Slip of the deceased in its proper perspective and wrongly assessed the income of the deceased at Rs.72,627/- per month, which they seek to re-assess based on Ex.P9. It is further submitted that to corroborate Ex.P9, bank statement of the deceased along with memo dated 22.09.2025 has been produced to establish that the deceased was earning more than Rs.12,00,000/- per annum. It is further submitted that the award of compensation under the conventional heads is not inconsonance with the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi & Others, [2017 (16) SCC 680] and Magma General Insurance Company Limited Vs. Nanu Ram & Others, [(2018) 18 SCC 130] . Sri. V.S. Kalasurmath submits that the Tribunal has erred in apportioning the compensation at the rate of 80% to the wife and 20% to the parents, which he MFA.CROB No. 100055 of 2020 HC-KAR seeks to modify the same by considering the fact that the claimant-wife is a single lady and she can move on in her life and the parents are age old persons suffering from different ailments. Hence, they seek to modify the apportionment appropriately by allowing the appeals filed by the parents and wife of the deceased.

6. Per contra, Smt. Preeti Shashank, learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company vehemently opposes the appeal and cross-objection filed by the parents and the wife and submits that the Tribunal has failed to take note of the income tax return filed