- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:8007 MFA No. 5274 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5274 OF 2019(MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. LOKESH S/O. VIRUPAKASHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, 8TH CROSS, A BLOCK, SHARAVATHI NAGAR, SHIVAMOGGA -577 201 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. M.V. MAHESWARAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. FIYAZ AHAMED S/O LATE ABDUL RAKHIB SAB, AGE 48 YEARS, R/AT ANJUMAN ROAD, HORAPETE, CHITRADURGA - 578 221 2. OBEDULLA S/O. MUNAWAR AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, HOUSE NO. 245, ASHRAYA LAYOUT, CHITRADURGA -578 221 Digitally signed by CHAITHRA P Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:8007 MFA No. 5274 of 2019 3. BRANCH MANAGER M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R3; V/O/D 29.03.2023, NOTICE TO R1 & R2 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.03.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.588/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT-8, SHIVAMOGGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the claimant being dissatisfied by the inadequate compensation award by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT at Shivamogga. 2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that on 30.01.2015, when the appellant was - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:8007 MFA No. 5274 of 2019 travelling on his motorcycle as a pillion rider at that time the driver of a lorry bearing registration No.KA-08-0469 came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the motorcycle due to which the claimant who was a pillion rider fell down sustained grievous injuries, immediately he took treatment at A.J. hospital and Research Center, Manglore prior to that he took treatment at Sahyadri Narayana Hrudayalaya. Due to the injuries suffered in the road traffic accident and expenditures meted out for the treatment he claimed compensation against the respondents - the owner, driver and the Insurance company of the offending vehicle. 3. Respondent No.2 remained absent was placed exparte. Respondent Nos.1 and 3 filed statement of objections denied the claim of the claimant and sought for dismissal of the claim petition. 4. On the basis of materials placed on record both oral and documentary, tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.4,27,423/- and fastened 10% - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:8007 MFA No. 5274 of 2019 contributory negligence as against the rider of the motorcycle. 5. It is the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the tribunal has committed an error in not awarding just and reasonable compensation and has failed to look into the medical records, the evidence adduced by the claimant and the doctor and the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. It is also contended that tribunal has failed to award compensation under the head loss of amenities and so also under other heads suitable compensation is not awarded. He further contends that despite the evidence adduced by the doctor as CW.1, the disability component has not been awarded. Learned counsel for the appellant also contends that the fastening of 10% contributory negligence as against the claimant is erroneous as the claimant was not a rider as he was a pillion rider and so also no FIR or charge sheet laid against the rider of the motorcycle to fix contributory negligence. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:8007 MFA No. 5274 of 2019 On these grounds, he seeks to allow the appeal consequently enhance the compensation. 6. Per contra, learned counsel representing the Insurance Company sustains the impugned order. He contends that the compensation awarded is just and reasonable, all aspects have been taken into consideration. There is no disability expressed by the doctor. Hence, question of awarding loss of future earning capacity due to disability would not arise and on all other heads just and reasonable compensation is awarded which does not call for interference at the hands of this Court. Consequently, he seeks dismissal of the appeal. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent - Insurance Company. 8. Perused the impugned judgement and award. The occurrence of accident, involvement of vehicle, injuries suffered in the road traffic accident are proved and - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:8007 MFA No. 5274 of 2019 established by production of Ex.P1 to Ex.P13. Negligence is rightly attributed against the driver of the offending vehicle but I am afraid that the contributory negligence fastened on the claimant will have to be looked into proper perspective in the following paragraphs. 9. Now coming to the aspect of age, avocation, income and the compensation that is to be awarded, it is seen the claimant as on the date of occurrence of accident was aged 35 years. Admittedly, he was the pillion rider. 10. Though doctor has been examined as CW1. He has not clearly opined with regard to disability to the body so also neither in the wound certificate anything is said so. Disability certificate is not produced. Therefore disability cannot be presumed in the absence of any such records by the claimant himself. 11. Based on the injuries and several fractures sustained by the claimant, tribunal has awarded Rs.1,00,000/- towards pain and suffering same sustained - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:8007 MFA No. 5274 of 2019 and retained. Towards medical expenses Rs.2,81,423/- is retained. 12. Loss of income during laid up period would be enhanced at the rate of Rs.9,000/- which is taken as income in the present case as against Rs.7,000/- opined by the tribunal. Rs.27,000/- is taken as income during the laid up period. 13. The claimant was inpatient for 20 days. Tribunal has awarded Rs.25,000/- towards conveyance, attendant charges and food and nourishment same is retained. 14. The tribunal has not awarded any amount towards amenities, Rs.50,000/- awarded under this head. 15. In view of the above discussions, appellant would be entitled for a total compensation of Rs.4,83,423/- as against Rs.4,27,423/- as mentioned in the table below: - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:8007 MFA No. 5274 of 2019 Heads Amount in Rs. Towards pain and sufferings 1,00,000.00 Towards medical expenses 2,81,423.00 Towards loss of income during laid up period 27,000.00 Towards conveyance, attendant charges and food and nourishment 25,000.00 Amenities 50,000.00 TOTAL 4,83,423-00 16. Coming to the aspect of the contributory negligence fastened at 10% as against the claimant, I am afraid the same is incorrect and accordingly erroneous. There is no FIR or Charge sheet laid against the rider of the motor cycle and the claimant being a pillion rider, he cannot be fastened with the contributory negligence. No material is placed on record to show that the pillion rider of the motor cycle was responsible or negligent to the occurrence of the accident and contributed to the - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:8007 MFA No. 5274 of 2019 occurrence of the accident. Therefore, the contributory negligence of 10% fastened as against the rider effecting the claimant hereby is set aside. 17. Entire negligence is to be fastened on the driver of the offending vehicle, consequently the owner and the Insurance Company as the policy is in force as on the date of occurrence of accident. 18. Accordingly, I pass the following order: ORDER i) Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated 11.03.2019 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and II Addl. Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Shivamogga in MVC.No.588/2016 is modified; iii) Impugned judgment insofar as fastening 10% Contributory negligence as against the rider of the motor cycle, is hereby set aside. iv) The appellant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.4,83,423/-. v) The appellant would be entitled to interest at 6% p.a. for enhanced compensation. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:8007 MFA No. 5274 of 2019 vi) Balance compensation shall be paid within a period of four weeks from today from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. vii) Entire compensation shall be released in favour of the appellant by way of electronic transfer on appellant producing relevant bank details on proper identification. viii) The records shall be sent back to the jurisdictional tribunal forthwith. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE RCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 49 CT:SNN