Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal Anusha vs Manjunatha - Motor Vehicle Accident A...
Priority review Enforcement Amended Final

Anusha vs Manjunatha - Motor Vehicle Accident Appeal

Favicon for indiankanoon.org India Karnataka High Court
Filed
Detected
Email

Summary

The Karnataka High Court is hearing appeals related to a motor vehicle accident case. The appeals concern judgments and awards passed in previous proceedings, with the insurance company and the accident victims' legal representatives as parties. The court is reviewing decisions made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal.

Published by GP on indiankanoon.org . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

What changed

This document details two Miscellaneous First Appeals (MFA No. 7005 of 2021 and MFA No. 2185 of 2023) filed before the Karnataka High Court concerning a motor vehicle accident. The appeals are against a judgment and award passed by the XVI Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, MACT, Bengaluru, in MVC No. 2459/2019. The appellant is M/s. Liberty General Insurance Co. Ltd., and the respondents include the legal heirs of the deceased, Late Manjunatha H S, and other parties involved in the accident.

These appeals indicate a dispute over the compensation awarded in the original motor vehicle accident claim. Compliance officers in the insurance sector should note that such appeals can lead to revised awards, potential changes in payout amounts, and may require adjustments to reserves or claims handling procedures. The proceedings involve the interpretation and application of the Motor Vehicles Act, specifically Section 173(1) regarding appeals against awards. Further developments in these appeals could impact claims processing and financial provisioning for similar cases.

What to do next

  1. Review Liberty General Insurance Co. Ltd.'s ongoing litigation status for MFA No. 7005 of 2021 and MFA No. 2185 of 2023.
  2. Assess potential financial impact of appeal outcomes on claims reserves and payouts.
  3. Monitor judicial decisions related to motor vehicle accident compensation appeals in Karnataka.

Archived snapshot

Mar 25, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

## Unlock Advanced Research with PRISM AI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

Smt. Anusha vs Sri. Manjunatha .R on 17 March, 2026

-1-
MFA No. 7005 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
                     DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
                                      PRESENT
                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
                                        AND
                       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
             MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7005 OF 2021 (MV-D)
                                        C/W
             MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2185 OF 2023 (MV-D)

             IN MFA No. 7005/2021

             BETWEEN:

             1.    THE MANAGER
                   M/S. LIBERTY GENERAL INSURNACE CO. LTD.,
                   (FORMERLY KNOWN AS LIBERTY VIDEOCON
                   GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,)
                   PRESENTLY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
                   NO. 21/15, "THE LANDMARK"
                   4TH FLOOR
                   NEAR TRINITY METRO STATION
                   MG ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001

Digitally REP. BY MANAGER
signed by
SREEDHARAN
BANGALORE
SUSHMA ...APPELLANT
LAKSHMI (BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR S SAMPRATHI, ADVOCATE)
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka AND:

             1.     SMT. ANUSHA
                    W/O LATE MANJUNATHA H S
                    AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS

             2.     MASTER NISCHITH S.M.
                    S/O. LATE MANJUNATHA H S
                    AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS
                        -2-
                                 MFA No. 7005 of 2021
                             C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023
  1. MASTER PREETHAM S M
    S/O LATE MANJUNATH H S
    AGED 2 YEARS

    SINCE RESPONDENT NO.2 AND 3 ARE
    MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER
    AND NATURAL GUARDIAN 1ST RESPONDENT

  2. SMT. SHARADAMMA
    W/O. HANUMANTHARAJU
    AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS

    ALL ARE RESIDING AT
    NO.3, SRIGIRIPURA
    MAGADI TALUK
    BENGALUGU RURAL DISTRICT

  3. MANJUNATH R
    S/O. LATE RAMASWAMY

    SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL
    REPRESENTATIVE

5(a) SMT. BANNAMMA B
W/O. LATE MANJUNATH R
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.12/2, 10TH CROSS
JAI MARUTHI NAGAR
NANDINI LAYOUT
BENGALURU - 560 096.

                                    ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. MUNIYAPPA C R GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1-R4;
SRI. R SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE FOR R5)

 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE

JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.28.10.2021 PASSED IN MVC
NO.2459/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE,
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU,
(SCCH-14) AND ETC.,
-3-
MFA No. 7005 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023

IN MFA NO. 2185/2023

BETWEEN:

  1. SMT. ANUSHA
    

    W/O LATE MANJUNATH H.S.
    AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,

  2. MASTER NISCHITH S.M.
    

    S/O. LATE MANJUNATHA H.S.
    AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS

  3. MASTER PREETHAM S.M.
    

    S/O LATE MANJUNATHA S.M.
    AGED ABOUT 2 YEARS

  4. SMT.SHARADAMMA
    

    W/O HANUMANTHARAJU
    AGED 50 YEARS,

    SINCE APPELLANT NOS.2 & 3 ARE MINORS,
    REPTD. BY THEIR
    NATURAL GUARDIAN
    AND MOTHER
    SMT. ANUSHA-APPELLANT NO.1

    ALL ARE R/AT NO.3,
    SRIGIRIPURA,
    MAGADI TALUK,
    BENGALURU
    RURAL DISTRICT.
    ...APPELLANTS
    (BY SRI. RAJU S, ADVOCATE)

AND:

  1. SRI. MANJUNATHA .R
    

    S/O LATE RAMASWAMY,

    SINCE DEAD BY HIS LR.,

1(a) SMT. BANNAMMA B
W/O. LATE MANJUNATH R
-4-
MFA No. 7005 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023

  AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
  RESIDING AT
  NO.12/2,
  10TH CROSS
  JAI MARUTHI NAGAR
  NANDINI LAYOUT
  BENGALURU NORTH
  BENGALURU - 560 096.
  1. LIBERTY VIDEOCON GENERAL
    INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
    OFFICE NO.1, ALYASA,
    1ST FLOOR
    REAR PORTION,
    OLD NO.28
    NEW NO.23,
    RICHMOND ROAD
    BENGALURU - 25
    REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.

                                      ...RESPONDENTS
    

(BY SRI. RAVI S SAMPRATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. R SHASHIDHARA, ADVOCATE FOR LR., OF R1)

  THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST

THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.10.2021 PASSED IN
MVC NO.2459/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT,
XVI ADDITONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES,
BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-14) AND ETC.,

  THESE APPEALS, HAVING BEEN RESERVED, COMING ON

FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THIS DAY,
S RACHAIAH J, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH
-5-
MFA No. 7005 of 2021
C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023

               CAV JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH)
  1. Heard Sri Raju S., learned counsel for the appellants, Sri

    Ravi S.Samprathi, learned counsel for the respondent

    No.2 and Sri R. Shashidhara, learned counsel for legal

    heir of deceased respondent No.1 in Miscellaneous First

    Appeal No.2185/2023.

  2. Heard Sri Ravi S. Samprathi, learned counsel for the

    appellant, Sri Muniyappa C.R. Gowda, learned counsel

    for C/respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Sri R. Shashidhara,

    learned counsel for the respondent No.5 in Miscellaneous

    First Appeal No.7005/2021.

  3. Miscellaneous First Appeal No.2185/2023 is filed by the

    claimants seeking enhancement of compensation, being

    aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 28.10.2021

    in MVC No.2459/2019 passed by the XVI Additional

    Judge, Court of Small Causes and MACT, Bengaluru,

    (SCCH-14) (for short 'Tribunal'), whereas, Miscellaneous

    First Appeal No.7005/2021 is filed by the Insurance

    Company challenging the quantum and liability of the

    Insurer.

-6- MFA No. 7005 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023

  1. The ranks of the parties before the Tribunal will be

    considered henceforth for convenience.

    The factual matrix of the case is as under:

  2. On 04.09.2018 at about 10.30 p.m., Manjunath was

    proceeding as a pillion rider on the motorcycle bearing

    its registration No.KA.02.HK.5635 with his relative from

    Dabaspet towards Sreegiripura. It is further stated that

    the said motorcycle was being driven by its rider at a

    very high speed, recklessly and in a rash and negligent

    manner, endangering human life, without observing the

    traffic rules and regulations. When the said motorcycle

    reached near Honnenahalli Thandya, Sompura Hobli,

    Nelamangala Taluk, the rider of the motorcycle, without

    observing the road hump, lost his control over the

    vehicle, as a result of which, the pillion rider was thrown

    off from the motorcycle, consequently, he fell down and

    sustained grievous injuries on head, left shoulder, face

    and other parts of the body. He was shifted to Sparsh

    Hospital as an indoor-patient and then, shifted to

    Basavashree Diagnostics and then, shifted to Sparsh

    Hospital. However, he succumbed to the injuries on

    23.02.2019.

-7- MFA No. 7005 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023

  1. The claimants, being the legal heirs of the deceased

    Manjunath, approached the Tribunal for compensation.

    The Tribunal awarded Rs.32,56,100/- along with

    interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of

    the petition till its realization.

Miscellaneous First Appeal No.2185/2023

  1. Being aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the

    claimants/appellants have preferred this appeal seeking

    for enhancement of compensation.

  2. The learned counsel for the appellants contended that

    the deceased was running a barbershop and he was

    earning Rs.30,000/- per month, the said fact ought to

    have been considered by the Tribunal. However, the

    income of the deceased was taken at Rs.9,000/- per

    month, which needs to be enhanced. Similarly, the

    medical expenditure borne by the deceased was more

    than Rs.20,00,000/-. However, the Tribunal awarded a

    meagre amount as medical expenditure that needs to be

    modified.

  3. It is further submitted that the compensation under

    other heads ought to have been enhanced by the -8- MFA No. 7005 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023 Tribunal in accordance with the settled principles of law.

    Having failed to enhance the said compensation, resulted

    in filing of this appeal. Therefore, the compensation has

    to be re-determined as per the records produced before

    the Tribunal by allowing this appeal. Making such

    submissions, learned counsel for the appellants prays to

    allow the appeal.

  4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2/Insurance

    Company vehemently submitted that, in fact, both the

    quantum and liability are disputed and a separate appeal

    has been filed challenging the award passed by the

    Tribunal. Therefore, the compensation awarded by the

    Tribunal is against to the settled principles of law and

    hence, the same has to be reduced. Making such

    submissions, learned counsel for the respondent No.2

    prays to reject the appeal.

  5. Be that as it may, the Tribunal has considered the

    income of the deceased is of Rs.9,000/- per month.

    However, there is no justification for considering the said

    income. In fact, the accident occurred on 04.09.2018.

    It is the submission of the learned counsel for the -9- MFA No. 7005 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023 claimants that the deceased was working as a Barber

    and he was earning more than Rs.30,000/- per month.

    Having considered the said aspect, we deem it

    appropriate to consider the income of the deceased at

    Rs.14,000/- per month.

  6. Further, it has also been considered that the appellants

    are the legal heirs of the deceased Manjunath, and there

    are four dependants in all. Therefore, 1/4th of the

    income of the deceased has to be deducted towards

    personal expenditure. The Tribunal has deducted

    accordingly. Hence, there is no irregularity in the said

    deduction.

  7. Further, the loss of consortium had to be considered by

    the Tribunal as per the settled principle of law, i.e.,

    Rs.40,000/- per person.

  8. Having considered the said aspects and also after having

    gone through the medical bills produced by the

    appellants before the Tribunal, we modify the award, as

    stated below in the table:-

  • 10 - MFA No. 7005 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023
  • The modified table is as under:

Award amount
Sl.
Particulars (in Rupees)
No.
Tribunal This Court
01 Loss of dependency 19,27,800 29,98,800
[14,000+5600=19600x12x17
x1/4 =29,98,800/-]
02 Medical expenditure till death 12,58,300 12,58,300
03 Loss of Consortium 40,000 1,60,000
[40000x4]
04 Loss of Estate 15,000 15,000
05 Funeral Expenses 15,000 15,000
TOTAL 32,56,100 44,47,100
Therefore, we have enhanced the compensation as per the

chart stated above. The enhanced compensation has to be

divided as per the apportionment made by the Tribunal.

Miscellaneous First Appeal No.7005/2021
16. Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company

  challenged the impugned award passed by the Tribunal,

  stating that the Tribunal committed an error in holding

  that the deceased was traveling as a pillion rider on the

  motorcycle.
  1. It is further stated that, the deceased himself was riding

    the motorcycle as per Ex.R1 - MNC report. The

    motorcycle got skidded. The rider had fallen from the

  • 11 -

MFA No. 7005 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023 motorcycle and he had sustained injuries. The self-

     accident of the rider has been wrongly converted into that

     of a pillion rider, which is far from the truth. Therefore,

     the liability to pay the said amount would not arise.
  1.   To substantiate the said contention, learned counsel for
    
      the appellant has relied on the following judgments:-
    

i) Ningamma v. United India Insurance
Company Limited1

ii) National Insurance Company Limited v.

Ashalata Bhowmik & Others2

iii) The New India Assurance Company Limited
v. Smt. Jyothi & Others3

iv) National Insurance Company Limited v.

Balakrishnan & Another4

v) New India Assurance Company Limited v.
Asha Rani & Others5

  1.   Learned counsel for the respondents/claimants justified
    
      the award passed by the Tribunal in respect of the
    
      liability.       However, he has disputed the quantum 1 LAWS (SC) 2009 5 218 2 AIR 2018 SC 4133 3 MFA 2306/2023 dated 18.03.2025 4 2013 ACJ 199 5 2003 ACJ 1
    
  • 12 -

MFA No. 7005 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023 awarded by the Tribunal in respect of the loss of

  dependency and consortium.
  1. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties

    and on perusal of the award passed by the Tribunal

    insofar as the liability of the appellant is concerned, it is

    an undisputed fact that the names of the rider and pillion

    rider are one and the same. A complaint came to be

    registered by the complainant stating that the rider and

    pillion rider were proceeding on the motorcycle, and the

    rider of the motorcycle had made the motorcycle to

    jump on the road hump, due to his negligence.

    Consequently, the pillion rider fell down on the road and

    had sustained injuries. It is an admitted fact that a

    mahazar was drawn as per Ex.P2 which indicates that

    there was a road hump at the place where the accident

    had occurred.

  2. It is needless to state that, the Motor Vehicles Act is a

    beneficial legislation. It is made and enacted for the

    purpose of awarding the compensation to sufferers who

    suffered injuries and also death of the family members

    in a road accident. When the eyewitnesses have stated

  • 13 -

MFA No. 7005 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023 that the rider and the pillion rider were proceeding on

  the     motorcycle,    and     both      persons    are   named   as

  Manjunatha, the liability certainly would be fixed on the

  Insurance Company.            Hence, the appeal filed by the

  Insurance Company challenging the liability and the

  quantum needs to be dismissed.
  1. In the light of the observations made above, we proceed

    to pass the following:-

ORDER

i) Miscellaneous First Appeal No.2185/2023 filed by

the appellants/claimants is allowed-in-part.

ii) The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal

in M.V.C. No.2459/2019 dated 28.10.2021 is

modified. The claimants are entitled for a total

compensation of Rs.44,47,100/- (Rupees Forty

Four Lakh Forty Seven Thousand One Hundred

only) as against Rs.32,56,100/- awarded by the

Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per

annum on the enhanced compensation of

Rs.11,91,000/- from the date of filing of the

claim petition till the date of its realization.
- 14 -

MFA No. 7005 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023

iii) The Insurance Company / respondent No.2 in

    Miscellaneous   First     Appeal     No.2185/2023   is

    directed to deposit the enhanced compensation

    amount together with interest within six weeks

    from the date of receipt of a copy of this

    judgment.

iv) Apportionment, disbursement and deposit of the

    enhanced compensation shall be made in terms

    of the award of the Tribunal.

v) Draw the modified award accordingly.

vi) Miscellaneous First Appeal No.7005/2021 filed by

    the Insurance Company stands dismissed.

vii) The amount deposited by the Insurance

    Company/respondent No.2 shall be transmitted

    to the Tribunal for necessary action.

viii) The Registry is directed to send a copy of this

    judgment to the Tribunal along with its record,

    forthwith.
  • 15 -

MFA No. 7005 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 2185 of 2023 In view of the disposal of the appeals, all pending

  applications, if any, shall stand disposed of, as they do

  not survive for any consideration.

Sd/-

(D K SINGH)
JUDGE

                                     Sd/-

(S RACHAIAH)
JUDGE

Bss

Get daily alerts for India Karnataka High Court

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from GP.

What's AI-generated?

The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
GP
Filed
March 17th, 2026
Instrument
Enforcement
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Substantive
Document ID
MFA No. 7005 of 2021 / MFA No. 2185 of 2023

Who this affects

Applies to
Insurers
Industry sector
5241 Insurance
Activity scope
Motor Vehicle Accident Claims
Geographic scope
IN IN

Taxonomy

Primary area
Transportation
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Insurance Personal Injury

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when India Karnataka High Court publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!