- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104127 OF 2019 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101889 OF 2019 IN MFA NO. 104127 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. SHIVA KUMAR M. S/O. VIJAY KUMAR M. AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT & COOLIE, R/O: SIRIWARA VILLAGE, BALLARI, TQ & DIST:583101 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MANJUNATH G. PATIL, ADV) AND: 1. ADI BASAPPA S/O. KAREPPA S/O. D. ABDUL SAB, AGE: 57 YEARS, RIDER CUM OWNER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE BEARING REG.NO.KA-34/ED-3202 R/O: SIRIWARA VILLAGE, BALALRI TQ & DIST-583101. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., GSR TOWERS, PARVATHI NAGAR, SIRUGUPA MAIN ROAD, BALLARI-583101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R.R. MANE, ADV FOR R2, NOTICE R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.02.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.740/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDL. SENOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT-V, BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, IN MFA NO. 101889 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, GSR TOWERS, PARVATHI NAGAR, SIRUGUPPA MAIN ROAD, BALLARI, BY ITS ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. R.R. MANE, ADV) AND: 1. SHIVA KUMAR M. S/O VIJAY KUMAR M. AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: SIRIWARA VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: BALLARI-583101. 2. ADI BASAPPA S/O KAREPPA AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: RIDER CUM OWNER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO. KA-34/ED-3202, R/O. SIRIWARA VILLAGE, TQ & DIST: BALLARI-583101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH G. PATIL, ADV FOR R1, SRI. ASHOK I. BADIGER, ADV FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.02.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.740/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-V, BALLARI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.1,47,519/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS DEPOSIT. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) 1. These appeals, by the petitioner and the insurance company arise out of the judgment and award dated 22.02.2019 passed in MVC No.740 of 2017 by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge, and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V, Ballari. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of these appeals are as follows: On 04.10.2017, when the petitioner was standing on the proper side of the road, the motorcycle bearing Reg. No. KA- 34-ED-3202 ridden by its rider came at a great speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the petitioner. As a result, the petitioner fell down and sustained injuries. Hence, filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation for the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 3. The rider cum owner of the offending motorcycle filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition, contending that the rider possessed a valid and effective license as of the date of the accident and accordingly, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the owner of the motorcycle. 4. The insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the rider of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company. 5. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed relevant issues. 6. The petitioner to substantiate his case, examined himself as PW1, examined the doctor as PW2, and marked 13 documents as Exhibits P1 to P13. In rebuttal, the officer of the insurance company was examined as RW1, and marked 3 documents as Exhibits R1 to R3. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 7. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgment dated 22.02.2019 and awarded a global compensation of ₹1,47,519/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till its deposit and saddled the liability on the owner and the insurance company jointly and severally and further, the insurance company was directed to deposit the compensation amount. 8. The insurance company, aggrieved by the impugned judgment passed by the Tribunal in saddling the liability, preferred an appeal in MFA No.101889/2019, and the petitioner, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal preferred appeal in MFA No.104127/2019 seeking for an enhancement of the compensation. 9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the insurance company, and the learned counsel for the petitioner. 10. Learned counsel for the insurance company submits that as of the date of the accident the license issued - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 in the name of the rider of the motorcycle was expired, and the same was not renewed. Hence, there is a breach of policy conditions and the Tribunal committed an error in saddling the liability jointly and severally. Therefore, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal filed by the insurance company, and to dismiss the appeal filed by the petitioner. 11. Per contra, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. He also submits that as of the date of the accident, the driver of the offending vehicle possessed a valid and effective driving license and he has produced the photo copy of the driving license of the driver of the offending vehicle, which discloses that the rider was possessing a PDL license and was valid as of the date of the accident. Therefore, on these grounds, prays to allow the appeal filed by the petitioner and to dismiss the appeal filed by the insurance company. 12. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 13. The point that would arise for consideration are regarding the liability and the quantum of compensation. 14. Regarding Liability: There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident, the injuries sustained by the petitioner in the road traffic accident and the accident having occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the offending motorcycle. The insurance company has taken a specific contention in the statement of objections that, as of the date of the accident the rider of the motorcycle did not possess a valid and effective driving license and the said license had expired about 5½ months before the date of the accident. In so far as the expiry of the license as of the date of the accident is concerned, the Division Bench of this Court, had an occasion to consider the said issue in the case of Nagappa@ Nagaraja and others v. Ravi Kuppaluru and others in MFA 103680 of 2015 and connected matter disposed of on 08.02.2019, wherein the Division Bench of this Court held as follows: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 “ 27. ....mere fact that the driver of the vehicle had not got his driving licence renewed on the date of the accident and got it renewed subsequently would not amount to breach of condition of the policy as it cannot be said that there was violation of the condition of the policy...” 15. Therefore, it is clear that mere fact that the driver of the vehicle had not renewed the license as of the date of the accident and it was renewed subsequently, would not amount to a breach of conditions of the policy. It cannot be said that there is a violation of the policy conditions. Admittedly, in the instant case, the rider of the offending motor vehicle possessed a license as of the date of the accident. Mere non-renewal of license is not a ground to absolve the liability of the insurance company. Considering the proposition of law laid down by the Co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court in the case of Nagappa (supra), the Tribunal was justified in saddling the liability jointly and severally. I do not find any error in the finding recorded by the Tribunal on the ground of liability. I concur with the findings recorded by the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 Tribunal on liability. In view of the same, the point regarding liability is answered accordingly. 16. Regarding quantum: The petitioner has completed ITI, and is studying B.A. Due to the accident, the petitioner is not in a position to sit, and stand and squat properly. The petitioner, to prove his income, has not produced any income proof. In the absence of income proof, the notional income has to be assessed as per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka Legal Services Authority. The accident occurred in 2017. The notional income is taken at ₹ 10,250/- per month. In additional to it, 40% future prospects is to be added, as per the proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS PRANAY SETHI AND OTHERS reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680. The petitioner examined the doctor as PW2 who has opined that the petitioner has suffered a permanent disability to an extent of 40% to the whole body, whereas the Tribunal has taken the disability at 13% which is on the lower side. This court taking into consideration the evidence of PW2 and the medical - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 records, re-assess the permanent disability at 18% and re- assess the compensation under the following heads. Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs. Compensation re-assessed by this Court Rs. 1 Pain and suffering 10,000/- 25,000/- 2 Loss of income during laid up period - 20,500/- 3 Food, nourishment etc. 10,000/- 20,000/- 4 Loss of amenities - 25,000/- 5 Loss of future earning/disability 84,240/- 5,57,128/- 6 Medical expenses 43,279/- 43,279/- TOTAL 1,47,519/- 6,91,707/- 17. Thus the petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of ₹6,91,707/- as against ₹1,47,519/-. The petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of ₹5,44,188/-. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The Appeal in MFA No.101889/2019 filed by the insurance company is dismissed. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11710 MFA No. 104127 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 101889 of 2019 ii. The Appeal in MFA No.104127/2019 filed by the petitioner is allowed in part. iii. The judgment and award dated 22.02.2019 passed in MVC No.740 of 2017 by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V, Ballari, is modified. iv. The petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of ₹5,44,188/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till realisation of the amount. v. The insurance company is directed to deposit the balance compensation amount within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The amount in deposit and the tribunal records be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. Draw the award accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE kmv CT: BSB