- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19695 MFA No. 3306 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3306 OF 2014 (MV-I) BETWEEN: B. RAMACHANDRAIAH, S/O BYREGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, HEGGADADEVANAPURA, ALUR POST, BANGALORE NORTH TALUK. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V SHASTRI.,ADVOCATE) AND: THE DIRECTOR, M/S. ELEGANT ROCKS (P) LTD., R/AT PLOT NO.202, BOMMASANDRA INDUSTRIAL AREA, II PHASE, HOSUR ROAD, BANGALORE. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI.B. J. MAHESH., ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.3.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.6161/2003 ON THE FILE OF THE MACT & XIV ADDL.JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19695 MFA No. 3306 of 2014 CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This is claimant's appeal against judgment and award dated 21.03.2013 passed by the MACT and XIV Addl Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, (SCCH-10) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short) in MVC No.6161/2003. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. It is the case of the claimant that on 13.09.2003 at about 12.30 p.m., he met with an accident near Industrial Suburb, Yashwanthpur, Bangalore, due to rash and negligent driving of a canter bearing Reg.No.KA-05/A-4889, by its driver. As a result of which, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. He had taken treatment and he has been suffering from permanent disability. With these reasons, he prayed to award the compensation. 4. Respondent is owner of the said vehicle. It appears that vehicle was not insured at the time of accident. Respondent denied contentions of the claimant and also denied - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19695 MFA No. 3306 of 2014 that the claimant is suffering from permanent disability. With these reasons, it prayed to dismiss the claim petition. 5. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed the necessary issues for its determination. 6. The claimant to prove his case examined 3 witnesses as PWs.1 to 3 and got marked 11 documents as Exs.P1 to P11. Respondent has examined 1 witness as RW.1 and marked 1 document as Ex.R1. 7. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties, by the impugned judgment and award dated 20.03.2006, awarded the compensation of Rs.3,47,680/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 8. Respondent contended that it had paid Rs.1,15,000/- to claimant as full and final settlement of his claim, under Workmen Compensation Act. The claimant contended that his employer sonal holdings had reimbursed Rs.1,15,000/- towards payment of medical bills. Respondent was unable to prove said contention before the Tribunal. That was noted in the earlier award of the Tribunal dated 20.03.2006, at paragraph No.10. Therefore, the Tribunal - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19695 MFA No. 3306 of 2014 directed the respondent to pay the entire amount of Rs.3,47,680/- with interest. 9. Being aggrieved by the said award dated 20.03.2006, respondent preferred MFA No.9977/2006 and it was heard by the Division Bench and appeal was partly awarded by the order dated 26.07.2011. This Court remanded the matter to the Tribunal to reconsider the matter in respect of payment of Rs.1,15,000/- said to be paid by the respondent to the claimant in full and final settlement of his claim. Thereafter, the Tribunal considered the same and by order dated 21.03.2013, rejected the contention of the respondent and confirmed its previous award dated 20.03.2006. Thereafter, the claimant has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation. 10. It is also pertinent to note that in MFA No.9977/2006, the appellant herein was the respondent. He has engaged an Advocate and the matter was argued. The claimant did not file any appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Even the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal was challenged by the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19695 MFA No. 3306 of 2014 respondent herein. The Division Bench of this Court, considering the merits of the matter, held that the amount of compensation awarded was just and proper; but it remanded to consider regarding payment of Rs.1,15,000/- by the respondent as full and final settlement under Workmen Compensation Act. 11. In view of these circumstances, this Court once again cannot go into the merit of the case and consider the contention of the appellant for enhancement of the compensation. He accepted the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and did not challenge the same. 12. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently contends that, this is a summary trial proceedings and strict rule of law is not applicable. In the Division Bench judgment, it was not a matter regarding enhancement of the compensation. Therefore, whatever finding given by the Division Bench, does not come in the way of this Court, to enhance compensation. The said submission is not acceptable because it was already considered by the Division Bench in MFA No.9977/2006. For the above said discussions, I pass the following: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:19695 MFA No. 3306 of 2014 ORDER i. The appeal is dismissed as not maintainable, in view of the disposal of MFA No.9977/2006 by the Division Bench of this Court dated 26.07.2011. ii. Send back TCR with copy of judgment to trial Court. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18