Suresh Satteppa Asangi vs Gangawwa Dalawai - Motor Vehicle Accident Appeal

## Unlock Advanced Research with PRISM AI

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

• Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc -... Upgrade to Premium [Cites 3, Cited by 0 ] ### Karnataka High Court

Suresh Satteppa Asangi vs Smt.Gangawwa W/O Shankar Dalawai on 17 March, 2026

Author: Ravi V.Hosmani

Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani

-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4297
MFA No. 101570 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 102968 of 2015

                        HC-KAR

                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD

                                 DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026

                                                BEFORE

                                 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI

                        MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101570/2017(MV-D)

                                                  C/W

                        MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102968/2015(MV-D)

                        IN MFA No. 101570/2017
                        BETWEEN:

                        1.   SMT. GANGAWWA
                             W/O. SHANKAR DALAWAI,
                             AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
                             R/O: HARUGERI, TQ: RAIBAG,
                             DIST: BELAGAVI.

                        2.   SHRI. SIDDALING
                              S/O. SHANKAR DALAWAI,
                             AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: NIL,

CHANDRASHEKAR
R/O: HARUGERI, TQ: RAIBAG,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
LAXMAN
KATTIMANI

Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN
KATTIMANI
Location: High Court of
Karnataka, Dharwad bench
Date: 2026.03.23 10:02:33

                        3.   JAYASHREE

+0000

                             D/O. SHANKAR DALAWAI,
                             AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
                             R/O: HARUGERI, TQ: RAIBAG,
                             DIST: BELAGAVI.

                                                                  ... APPELLANTS

                        (BY SRI. SANTOSH S. HATTIKATAGI, ADVOCATE)
                        -2-
                                   NC: 2026:KHC-D:4297
                             MFA No. 101570 of 2017
                         C/W MFA No. 102968 of 2015

HC-KAR

AND:

1. SHRI. SURESH SATTEPPA ASANGI,
   AGE:47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
   R/O: HARUGERI, TQ: RAIBAG,
   DIST: BELAGAVI.

2. TO THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
   THE NMEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO., LTD.,
   CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI.

                                       ...RESPONDENTS
   

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR BURJI, ADV. FOR R1;
SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADV. FOR R2)

 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.C.

ACT., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
PASSED BY THE LEARNED SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT,
RAIBAG, IN MVC NO.1318/2012 DATED 22.10.2013, INSOFAR
AS FIXING THE LIABILITY ON RESPONDENT NO.1 BY FIXING
THE SAME ON RESPONDENT NO.2, AND AWARD THE
COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE CLAIM PETITION, BY
ENHANCING ALLOWING THIS APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

IN MFA NO. 102968/2015
BETWEEN:

SURESH SATTEPPA ASANGI,
AGE:45 YEARS OCC:AGRL.,
R/O:HARUGERI, TQ:RAIBAG,
DIST:BELAGAVI.

                                       ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR BURJI, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SMT. GANGAWWA W/O. SHANKAR DALAWAI, -3- NC: 2026:KHC-D:4297 MFA No. 101570 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 102968 of 2015

HC-KAR

 AGE:43 YEARS, OCC:NIL.

1. SIDDALING
   S/O. SHANKAR DALAWAI,
   AGE:19 YEARS, OCC:NIL.

2. JAYASHREE
   D/O. SHANKAR DALAWAI,
   AGE:20 YEARS, OCC:NIL.

   R1 TO R3 ARE
   R/O:HARUGERI,
   TQ:RAIBAG, DIST:BELAGAVI.

3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
   THE NEW INDIA
   ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
   CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI.

                                   ...RESPONDENTS
   

(BY SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADV. FOR R4;
NOTICE TO R1 & R2 IS SERVED;
NOTICE TO R3 IS HELD SUFFICIENT)

 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.C.

ACT., PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.10.2013 PASSED BY COURT
OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT AT RAIBAG, IN
M.V.C.NO.1318/2012 FASTENING THE LIABILITY OF
APPELLANT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,

JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
-4-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:4297
MFA No. 101570 of 2017
C/W MFA No. 102968 of 2015

HC-KAR

                      ORAL JUDGMENT Challenging   judgment       and   award    dated     22.10.2013

passed by Senior Civil Judge and MACT at Raibag ('Tribunal',

for short) in MVC no.1318/2012, these appeals are filed.

1. MFA no.101570/2017 is filed by claimants for

enhancement of compensation as well as challenging finding on

liability while MFA no.102968/2015 is filed by owner

challenging finding on liability.

1. Sri Rajashekhar Burji, learned counsel for appellant

submitted that appeal was by owner of vehicle. It was

submitted that at 7:00 p.m. on 05.06.2012 one Shankar

Dalawai was riding his bicycle on his on left side of road in

Harugeri village, when driver of Tractor no.KA-23/TB-1281 with

trailers no.KA-23/TA-4795 and 4796 attached, drove it in rash

and negligent manner and dashed against bicycle. In accident,

Shankar sustained grievous injuries and succumbed to same

during treatment. His wife and two minor children filed claim

petition against owner and insurer of tractor vehicles under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. -5-

NC: 2026:KHC-D:4297 MFA No. 101570 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 102968 of 2015 HC-KAR

1. On contest, wherein claim petition was opposed on

all counts, Tribunal framed issues and recorded evidence.

Claimant no.1 deposed as PW1 and got marked Exhibits P1 to

P6. Respondents did not lead oral evidence, but got marked

copy of insurance policy with consent as Ex.R1.

1. On consideration, Tribunal held accident occurred

due to rash and negligent driving of tractor by its driver and

claimants were entitled for compensation of ₹3,54,920/- with

interest at 6% per annum. But on ground that insurance policy

issued in respect of tractor was with trailer no.KA-23/TB-1282

and 1283 and at time of accident, some other trailers were

attached in violation of terms and conditions of policy, Tribunal

eschewed liability of insurer.

1. It was submitted, since accident was head on

collision between tractor and bicycle, regardless of whether

trailers attached were insured, insurer of tractor cannot escape

liability. In support of his submission, learned counsel relied

upon decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Royal

Sundaram Alliance Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Smt.Honnamma -6- NC: 2026:KHC-D:4297 MFA No. 101570 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 102968 of 2015 HC-KAR

and Ors., 2025 INSC 625. On said ground sought for allowing

appeal.

1. Sri Santosh S.Hattikatagi, learned counsel while

adopting above submission insofar as liability submitted

claimants were seeking for enhancement. It was submitted, as

on date of accident, deceased Shankar was 55 years of age

earning ₹15,000/- per month from agriculture. However,

Tribunal unanimously considered ₹4,000/- as monthly income

and awarded inadequate compensation. It was submitted,

Tribunal erred in not adding 10% to future prospects as held by

Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of [National Insurance

Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Others](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/156498957/) reported in

AIR 2017 SC 5157. It also erred in applying multiplier of '10'

instead of '11'. It was submitted, compensation awarded under

conventional heads was also not inconsonance with decision in

Pranay Sethi and sought for allowing appeal.

1. On other hand, Sri GN Raichur, learned counsel for

respondent - insurer opposed appeals. It was submitted, there

was no dispute that some other uninsured trailers were

attached at time of accident in violation of terms and conditions -7- NC: 2026:KHC-D:4297 MFA No. 101570 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 102968 of 2015 HC-KAR

of policy and therefore, Tribunal had rightly discharged liability

on insurer. It was submitted that Tribunal had granted just

compensation leaving no scope for enhancement.

1. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned

judgment and award.

1. From above since owner as well as claimants are in

appeal challenging finding on liability as well as for

enhancement of compensation, points that arise for

consideration are:

1. Whether finding of Tribunal on liability of
   

   insurer calls for interference? and

2. Whether        claimants       are        entitled      for
   

   enhancement of compensation as prayed?

3.   Point no.1: Admittedly, accident occurred due to
   

head on collision between bicycle on which claimant was riding

and tractor. Hon'ble Supreme Court has turned down similar

contention about tractor with uninsured trailers causing

accident eschewing liability of insurer. It noted, accident was

caused by tractor and therefore insurer was held liable. Said -8- NC: 2026:KHC-D:4297 MFA No. 101570 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 102968 of 2015 HC-KAR

ratio would rarely apply to present case. Point no.1 is

accordingly answered in 'affirmative'.

1. Point no.2: Though claimants stated that deceased

was 55 years of age, earning ₹15,000/- per month from

agriculture, same was not substantiated. Therefore, Tribunal

was justified in assessing it notionally. But notional income for

year 2012 is ₹6,500/- and therefore, same has to be

considered. As per ratio in Pranay Sethi, in case of self-

employed aged between 50 and 60, addition towards future

prospects has to be 10%. Since there are three dependents,

deduction towards personal expenses has to be at 1/3rd and

multiplier applicable would be '11'. Thus, compensation towards

loss of dependency would be:

₹6,500 (+ 10%) (- 1/3rd) x 12 x 11 = ₹6,29,193/-.
13. In addition, claimants would be entitled to

₹40,000/- each towards spousal consortium and filial

consortium. Apart from same, they would be entitled for

₹15,000/- towards funeral expenses and ₹15,000/- towards

loss of estate. Since more than 6 years have lapsed after

decision in Pranay Sethi, they would be entitled for addition of -9- NC: 2026:KHC-D:4297 MFA No. 101570 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 102968 of 2015 HC-KAR

escalation at 20% to award under conventional head i.e.

₹30,000/-. Thus, total compensation would be as follows:

Sl.No. Head Amount

        (1)     Loss of dependency             ₹6,29,193/-

        (2)     Loss of spousal consortium     ₹1,20,000/-
                and filial consortium,

        (3)     Towards loss of estate and       ₹30,000/-
                funeral expenses

        (4)     Towards escalation               ₹30,000/-

                                       Total ₹8,09,193/- 14.      Point no.2 is answered 'partly in affirmative' as

above. Consequently, following:

ORDER

i. MFA no.102968/2015 is allowed.

ii. Fastening of liability on owner is set aside.

iii. Insurer is held liable to pay compensation.

iv. Amount in deposit, if any is ordered to be
refunded to the appellant.

v. MFA no.101570/2017 is allowed in part.

vi. Claimants are held entitled for reassessed
compensation of ₹8,09,193/- as against
₹3,54,920/- with interest at 6% per annum

• 10 -

NC: 2026:KHC-D:4297 MFA No. 101570 of 2017 C/W MFA No. 102968 of 2015 HC-KAR

from date of petition till realisation excluding
192 days delay in filing appeal.
vii. Insurer is directed to deposit enhanced
compensation before Tribunal within a period
of eight weeks.

viii. On deposit, Tribunal is directed to release
compensation in favour of claimants since
minor claimants would have attained age of
majority during pendency of appeal.

Sd/-

(RAVI V.HOSMANI)
JUDGE

CLK
CT: ASC
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21