- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15038 MFA No. 101224 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100884 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101224 OF 2021 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100884 OF 2020 IN M.F.A.NO.101224/2021 BETWEEN: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC (OWNER OF THE BUS NO.KA-35/F-37) HOSPET DIVISION, HOSPET, DIST: BELLARY. 2. K. SRINIVAS, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, DRIVERS OF THE KSRTC-BUS BEARING NO. KA-35/F 37, KSRTC BUS DEPOT HOSAPETE DIVISION, HOSAPETE-583201. THE APPELLANTS ARE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER, CENTRAL OFFICE, SARIGE SADANA, KALBURGI. …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. VAISHALI K. KALADAGI, ADVOCATE) AND: SMT. K. ANNAPURNA W/O. K. PRAKASH, AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O. KAKARLATHOTA, 5 WARD, BELLARY. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. MANJUNATH JADAI, ADVOCATE) GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15038 MFA No. 101224 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100884 of 2020 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE ABOVE APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04/10/2019 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-III, BELLARY IN M.V.C.1138/2016 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN M.F.A.100884/2020 BETWEEN: SMT. K. ANNAPURNA W/O. K. PRAKASH, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE WIFE, R/O. KAKARLATHOTA, 5TH WARD, BALLARI-583101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MANJUNATH JADAI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. K. SRINIVAS, AGE: 40 YEARS, DRIVER OF KSRTC BUS BEARING NO. KA-35/F-37, KSRTC DEPOT HOSAPETE DIVISION, HOSAPETE-583201. 2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC OWNER OF KSRTC BUS BEARING NO.KA-35/F-37, HOSAPETE DIVISION, HOSAPETE-583201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. VAISHALI K. KALADAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.10.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1138/2016 THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-III, AT BALLARI AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15038 MFA No. 101224 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100884 of 2020 THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Ms. Vaishali K. Kaladagi, learned counsel for the appellant in MFA 101224 of 2021, who is also representing respondent No.2 in the connected appeal as well as Sri Manjunath Jadai, learned counsel for the respondent in MFA 101224 of 2021, who is representing the appellant in the connected appeal. 2. These two appeals are the outcome of the award that is passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-III, Ballari in MVC 1138 of 2016 dated 04.10.2019. While the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter be referred to as ‘the corporation’ for the sake of convenience of discussion), against whom liability is fastened has preferred MFA 101224 of 2021, the claimant therein has filed MFA 100884 of 2020. The version of the corporation is that the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15038 MFA No. 101224 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100884 of 2020 compensation granted is high and exorbitant. On the other hand, the contention of the claimant is that she is entitled to a higher sum. 3. Undisputedly, the claimant sustained bilateral superior and inferior pubic ramus fracture and the said fracture remained mal-united despite the treatment given. PW2 assessed the disability in respect of whole body as 28%. But the tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 20%. While Ms. Vaishali K. Kaladagi submits that the disability taken in respect of whole body is on higher side, Sri Manjunath Jadai, learned counsel for the respondent submits that assessment of the disability by the tribunal is just and proper. 4. Having considered the evidence produced, this Court is of the view that the submission made by learned counsel for the corporation that the disability assessed by the tribunal is on higher side is justifiable. 5. Now coming to the income taken for assessment of compensation, as per the version of the claimant as house - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15038 MFA No. 101224 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100884 of 2020 maker she was getting Rs.5,000/- per month and she was contributing the same towards the maintenance of the family. The tribunal took into consideration the said amount only. But before this Court learned counsel for the claimant submits that the amount taken as earnings that is Rs.5,000/- per month is on lower side. When the claimant herself projects that her income is required to be taken as Rs.5,000/- and the tribunal took the same into consideration, now the said amount cannot be enhanced. 6. As rightly projected by learned counsel for the claimant, the compensation that was granted by the tribunal towards the expenditure which the claimant would have incurred for food, nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges, is on lower side. Admittedly, the claimant must have engaged someone to look after her, while she was at hospital and taking bed rest till the date of recovery and likewise someone would have attended her duties at home during the period of treatment and till the time of recovery. Thus considering all these aspects this Court is of the view that the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15038 MFA No. 101224 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100884 of 2020 compensation that is granted by the tribunal i.e. Rs.3,63,000/- can neither be termed to be exorbitant nor on lower side. The compensation that is granted by the Tribunal is just and reasonable therefore there is no scope either for reduction or for enhancement. Thus ultimately this Court holds that both the appeals deserve to be dismissed. 7. Resultantly both the appeals stand dismissed. 8. Amount if any in deposit, be transmitted to the concerned tribunal immediately. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE EM CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 78