IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202926 OF 2022 (MV-D)

BETWEEN:

1. BIBI W/O BANDENAWAZ DAFEDAR, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, 2. THOFIQ S/O BANDENAWAZ DAFEDAR, AGE: 14 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, 3. SAMEER S/O BANDENAWAZ DAFEDAR, AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, 4. MAIBOOB S/O BANDENAWAZ DAFEDAR, AGE: 10 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, 5. SHABHAN BEGUM D/O BANDENAWAZ DAFEDAR, AGE: 06 YEARS, APPELLANT NO.2 TO 5 ARE MINORS U/G OF THEIR NATURAL MOTHER THE APPELLANT NO.1.

6. PUTALI BEGUM W/O SHABANSAB, @ CHAWAL SAB DAFEDAR, AGE: 67 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, ALL ARE R/O KEMBHAVI, TQ. SHORAPUR, DIST. YADGIRI-585101 …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. KRUPA SAGAR PATIL, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SABANNA S/O MALLAPPA, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS AND OWNER OF VEHICLE NO. KA-33/A-5650, R/O HURUSAGUNDAGI, TQ. SHAHAPUR, DIST. YADGIR-585101

2. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL INS. CO.LTD., THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER, 1^ST FLOOR, KALABURAGI SQUARE, DESAI CROSS, DESHPANDE NAGAR, HUBBALLI-580006.

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH MALLAYYASHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2;

R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.02.2022, PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, SHORAPUR, IN FILE BEARING M.V.C. NO. 64/2020, AND ALLOW THE CLAIM PETITION BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AS PRAYED FOR IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K NATARAJAN AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL)

This appeal is filed by the claimants seeking for higher compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 18.02.2022 passed in MVC No.64/2020 by the Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Shorapur.

2. Sri Krupa Sagar Patil, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the Tribunal has committed a grave error in assessing the income of the deceased at Rs.9,000/- per month without appreciating the fact that the deceased was an agriculturalist, working as coolie and was earning Rs.18,000/- per month. He used to contribute the said amount to the family. It is submitted that the appellants are also entitled for future prospects at the rate of 40%, loss of consortium at Rs.40,000/- each with 10% escalation and compensation under the conventional heads. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal.

3. Sri Manjunath Mallayya Shetty, learned counsel appearing for respondent – insurance company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the appellants have not produced any evidence to prove the income of the deceased. It is submitted that the assessment of compensation by the Tribunal is just and proper which does not call for any enhancement. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 4. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants/claimants, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company and meticulously perused the materials on record. The point that arises for our consideration in this appeal is:

“Whether the appellants are entitled for enhancement of compensation? If so to what extent?”

5. The undisputed facts are that in a road accident dated 19.11.2019, one Bandenawaz succumbed to the injuries sustained in the road accident. The deceased was aged about 32 years at the time of accident as per the averments in the claim petition and the evidence on record. The deceased was an agriculturist and was also doing coolie work. It was claimed that he was earning Rs.18,000/- per month. However, no evidence is produced to substantiate the same. Considering the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, we notionally re-assess the income of the deceased at Rs.13,250/- per month. The deceased was aged about 32 years at the time of acci