- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MFA CROSS OBJ NO. 100097 OF 2020 (MV-) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103915 OF 2015 (MV-I) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103916 OF 2015 (MV-I) MFA CROSS OBJ NO. 100098 OF 2020 (MV-I) IN MFA.CROB No. 100097/2020 BETWEEN: 1. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 6TH FLOOR, LOCIA BUSINESS PARK, ANDERI-KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI NOW REP BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY-400047. …CROSS OBJECTOR (BY SRI. S K KAYAKAMATH, ADV) AND: 1. SRI. SUBHASH S/O VENKAPPA LAMANI AGE. 52 YEARS, OCC. MASON, R/O. PADMAVATHIPUR (GOVIND BADAVANE) TQ. RANEBENNUR DIST. HAVERI-58115. 2. SRI. NINGAPPA ADUR S/O MAILARAPPA AGE.MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. GUDDADA MATTIHALLI VILLAGE, TQ. HANGAL, DIST. HAVERI (OWNER OF TT UNIT BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KA-27/TA-6780 AND MYS-7577)-581104. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.S. HULMANI, ADV FOR R1, SRI. MAHESH WODEYAR, ADV FOR R2) THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.103915/2015 IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER DATED 21.11.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO. 968/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, RANEBENNUR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.20,70,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 12 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS PAYMENT. IN MFA NO. 103915/2015 BETWEEN: 1. SUBHASH S/O VENKAPPA LAMANI AGE:47 YEARS, OCC. MASON, NOW NIL R/O PADMAVATHIPUR (GOVIND BADAVANE) RANEBENNUR, TQ. RANEBENNUR DIST. HAVERI. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. G S HULMANI., ADV) AND: 1. NINGAPPA ADUR S/O MAILARAPPA AGE:MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS R/O GUDDADA MATHIHALLI TQ. HANGAL, DIST. HAVERI. 2. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 6TH FLOOR, LEELA BUSINESS PARK ANDHERI-KURLA ROAD ANDHERI(E) MUMBAI. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHESH WODEYAR, ADV FOR R1, SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADV FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.11.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.968/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT RANEBENNUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 103916/2015 BETWEEN: 1. ISHWARAPPA S/O PANAPPA LAMANI AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: MASON, NOW NIL, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER R/O: BASALIKATTI TANDA (PADMATHIPUR), TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. G S HULMANI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NINGAPPA ADUR S/O MAILARAPPA AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS R/O: GUDDADA MATHIHALLI, TQ: HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI. 2. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 6TH FLOOR, LEELA BUSINESS PARK, ANDHERI-KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI-(E), MUMBAI ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHESH WODEYAR, ADV FOR R1, SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADV FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.11.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.967/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT RANEBENNUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA.CROB NO. 100098/2020 BETWEEN: 1. HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., 6TH FLOOR, LEELA BUSINESS PARK, ANDERI-KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI, NOW REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY. ...CROSS OBJECTOR (BY SRI. S K KAYAKMATH, ADV) AND: 1. SRI. ISHWARAPPA S/O PANAPPA LAMMANI AGE. 27 YEARS, OCC. MASON, R/O. BASALIKATTI TANDA (PADMAVATHIPUR), - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER TQ RANEBENNUR, DIST HAVERI-581115. 2. SRI. NINGAPPA ADUR S/O MAILARAPPA AGE. MAJOR, OCC. BUSINESS, R/O. GUDDADA MATTIHALLI VILLAGE, TQ. HANGAL, DIST. HAVERI (OWNER OF TT UNIT BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KA-27/TA-6780 AND MYS-7577)-581110. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.S. HULMANI, ADV FOR R1, SRI. MAHESH WODEYAR, ADV FOR R2) THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.103916/2015 IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.11.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO. 967/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, RANEBENNUR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.1,58,400/- WITH INTEREST AT 7 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALISATION. THIS CROSS OBJECTION, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT 1. MFA crob No.100097 of 2020 is filed by the Insurance company and MFA No.103915 of 2015 is filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment and award dated 21.11.2015 passed in MVC No.968/2013 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Ranebennur (for short ‘the tribunal’). - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of these appeals are as follows: 3. On 22.09.2013, the petitioner was proceeding on a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-27/TA-6247 along with a pillion rider. At that time, the driver of the tractor and trailer unit bearing registration No.KA-27-TA-6780 and MYS-7577 drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle. As a result, the petitioner and pillion rider have sustained grievous injuries. The petitioner filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the MV Act seeking compensation for the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petitions. 4. Respondent No.1, who is the owner of the tractor and trailer unit filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition, and contended that the driver of the offending vehicle possessed a valid and effective driving license - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER as of the date of the accident and the policy was valid. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the owner of the tractor and trailer unit. 5. The insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the driver did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident, and the owner has violated the conditions of the policy and he had not insured trailer attached to the tractor as of the date of the accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company. 6. MFA No.103916/2015 is filed by the petitioner and MFA crob No.100098/2020 is filed by the Insurance company challenging the judgment and award dated 21.11.2015 passed in MVC No.967/2013 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Ranebennur. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER 7. The petitioner was a pillion rider on a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-27/TA-6247 who was proceeding with the petitioner in MVC No.968/2013. He has sustained grievous injuries in the road traffic accident. Accordingly, prays to allow claim petitions. 8. The owner of the tractor and trailer filed a statement of objections reiterating the statement of objections filed in MVC No.968/2013 and the insurance company also filed a statement of objections reiterating the statement of objections filed in MVC No.968/2013. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petitions. 9. The tribunal, has taken the claim petitions separately and based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 10. The petitioner in MVC No.967/2013 examined himself as PW.1, examined a doctor as PW.2 and marked 28 documents as Exs.P1 to P28. Conversely, the owner - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER of the tractor and trailer unit was examined as RW.1, the officer of the insurance company was examined as RW.2, and marked 5 documents as Exs.R1 to R5. The petitioner in MVC No.968/2013, examined himself as PW.1, examined a doctor as PW.2 and marked 43 documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P43. Conversely, the owner of the tractor and trailer unit was examined as RW.1. The official of the insurance company was examined as RW.3, also examined one witness as RW.2, and marked 7 documents as Ex.R1 to Ex.R7. 11. The tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petitions in part vide judgment dated 21.11.2015 and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,58,400/- with interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of petition till realization in MVC No.967/2013 and Rs.9,21,000/- with interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization in MVC No.968/2013, and held - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER respondent No.1 i.e., the owner alone liable to pay the compensation. 12. The owner of the vehicle being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in MVC Nos.967/2013 and 968/2013 preferred the appeals in MFA No.100239/2016 c/w MFA No.100240/2016, the Co-ordinate bench of this court vide judgment dated 24.10.2019 allowed the appeal filed by the owner of the tractor and trailer, and set aside the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal to the extent of fastening the liability on the owner of the tractor and trailer unit by holding the insurance company liable to pay the entire compensation amount. 13. The petitioners being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal filed the appeals in MFA No.103915/2015 and MFA No.103916/2015. The insurance company, also preferred the cross objections in MFA crob - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER Nos.100098/2020 and 100097/2020, challenging the quantum of compensation. 14. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, and the learned counsel for the insurance company. 15. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, in MVC No.968/2013, the doctor has assessed the disability at 85%, wherein the tribunal has assessed disability at 70% which is on lower side. He submits that though, the petitioners have not produced any proof of income, in the absence of proof of income, the tribunal should have taken notional income as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. 16. The accident occurred in 2013. The notional income should have been taken at Rs.7,000/-, wherein the tribunal has taken notional income at Rs.5,000/-, which is on the lower side. He also submits that the - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER disability assessed by the tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeals filed by the petitioners, and dismiss the cross objections filed by the insurance company. 17. Per contra, learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the compensation and disability assessed by the tribunal is on the higher side. He submits that the compensation awarded under the head of medical expenses is on higher side. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the appeals filed by the petitioners, and prays to allow the cross objections. 18. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 19. The points that would arise for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation in these appeals. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER 20. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident and also the injuries sustained by the petitioners in the road traffic accident. Further, to prove that, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle, the petitioners have produced a charge sheet marked as Ex.P6, which is filed against the driver of the offending vehicle. The charge sheet discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. The tribunal was justified in recording the finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. Reg. quantum of compensation in MFA No.103915/2015 and MFA crob No.100097/2020 (MVC No.968/2013): 21. Although, the petitioner contended that he was aged 45 years old as of the date of the accident, and the - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER petitioner was doing a coolie work and used to earn Rs. 10,000/-. The petitioner to substantiate his case, the petitioner has not produced any proof of income. In the absence of proof of income, the notional income is taken as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The accident occurred in 2013. Hence, monthly income of the petitioner is taken at Rs.7,000/-. The petitioner to prove the disability, examined a doctor as PW.2, who has deposed that the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries, and he opined that he examined the petitioner clinically and radiologically and issued a disability certified marked as Ex.P9 and he opined that the petitioner has suffered a disability to the extent of 85% to the whole body, wherein the tribunal has assessed disability at 70%. Considering the evidence of PW.2, and the medical records, this court reassesses the disability at 75%. The petitioner - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER aged about 50 years old as of the date of accident. The multiplier applicable to his age group is ‘13’. 22. Thus, this court reassess the compensation under the following heads: Sl. No. Heads. Amount in (Rs.) 1. Towards loss of future earning capacity (Rs.7,000/-X25%=1750) (Rs.8750 x 12 x 75% x 13) 10,23,750/- 2. Towards medical expenses 2,83,000/- 3. Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.8750X6) 52,500/- 4. Pain and suffering 75,000/- 5. Food, diet and nourishment 20,000/- 6. Conveyance and other sundry expenses. 15,000/- 7. Towards loss of amenities 40,000/- Total: 15,09,250/- LESS Compensation awarded by the Tribunal : 9,21,000/- Enhanced compensation: 5,88,250/- - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER 23. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to total compensation of Rs.15,09,250/- in MFA No.103915/2015 as against Rs.9,21,000/- awarded by the tribunal. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.5,88,250/-. Reg. quantum of compensation in MFA No.103916/2015 and MFA crob No.100097/2020 (MVC No.967/2013): 24. It is contended that the petitioner worked as a mason and used to earn Rs.10,000/- per month. To substantiate the contention the petitioner has not produced any proof of income. In the absence of income proof, this court has taken notional income as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. 25. The petitioner was aged 30 years old as of the date of accident. The monthly income of the petitioner is taken at Rs.7,000/- as per the schedule nofied by the - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and 40% future prospects is to be added to the income in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Ltd vs. Pranay Sethi reported in AIR 2017 SC 5157, i.e., Rs.7,000+40%= 9,800/-. The petitioner examined a doctor as PW.2, who has deposed that the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries and he opined that he examined the petitioner clinically and radiologically and issued a disability certified marked as Ex.P15 and he opined that the petitioner has suffered disability to the extent of 45% to the whole body, wherein the tribunal has assessed disability at 10% which is on the lower side. Considering the evidence of PW.2 and medical records, this court reassesses the disability at 15%. The petitioner was aged about 30 years old. The multiplier applicable to his age group is ‘17’. - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER 26. Thus, this court reassess the compensation under the following heads: Sl. No. Heads. Amount in (Rs.) 1. Towards loss of future earning capacity (Rs.9800 x 12 x 15% x 17) 2,99,880/- 2. Towards medical expenses 9,400/- 3. Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.9,800X2) 19,600/- 4. Pain and suffering 50,000/- 5. Food, nourishment and attendant charges 10,000/- 6. Towards loss of amenities 25,000/- Total: 4,13,880/- LESS Compensation awarded by the Tribunal : 1,58,400/- Enhanced compensation: 2,55,480/- 27. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to total compensation of Rs.4,13,880/- in MFA No.103916/2015 as against Rs.1,58,400/- awarded by the tribunal. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to enhanced compensation of - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER Rs.2,55,480/-. In view of the above discussion, the point is answered accordingly. 28. In view of the above discussions, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (i) MFA Nos.103915/2015 and 103916/2015 filed by the petitioners are allowed. (ii) MFA Crob Nos.100097/2020 and 100098/2020 filed by the Insurance company are dismissed. (iii) The judgment and award passed in MVC Nos.967/2013 and MVC No.968/2013 are modified. (iv) The petitioner in MFA No.103915/2016 is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.5,88,250/- and the petitioner in MFA No.103916/2016 is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.2,55,480/- with accrued - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12739 MFA.CROB No. 100097 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 103915 of 2015 MFA No. 103916 of 2015 AND 1 OTHER interest from the date of petition till realization of the amount. (v) The insurance company is directed to deposit Rs.5,88,250/- in MFA No.103915/2016 and Rs.2,55,480/- in MFA No.103916/2016 with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of the petition till realization of the amount and the insurance company directed to deposit the same within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (vi) The amount in deposit, if any, and the trial Court records be transmitted to the Tribunal, forthwith. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE SKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8