- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34764 M.F.A. No.477/2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.477/2023 (MV-I) BETWEEN: PREMKUMAR S/O T.M. SHIVARUDRAIAH AGE 30 YEARS R/O 2380/18 CHIKKAMANNI DEVARAJURS EXTENTION DAVANAGERE CITY 577 003. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADV.,) AND: 1. VISHWANATHA K.R. S/O RUDRAIAH K.H. AGED 26 YEARS R/O SHYAGALE VILLAGE DAVANAGERE TALUK AND DISTRICT 577 001 RIDER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO. KA-17/EY-4999. 2. VINAYAKA H.M. S/O SHIVASHANKARAIAH AGE MAJOR, R/O 2554/4 MCC-A BLOCK, CHURCH ROAD NEAR RAJU MEDICAL DAVNAGERE 577 001 OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KA-17/EY-4999. 3. THE CLAIMS MANAGER LIBERTY VIDEOCON GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD, 10TH FLOOR TOWER A PENINSULA BUSINESS Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: High Court of karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34764 M.F.A. No.477/2023 PARK, GANPATH RAO KADAM MARG LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI CITY MAHARASTRA STATE 400 013. 4. RAHUL B.S. S/O GANGADHARAPPA B AGED 32 YEARS R/O 482, BEHIND BSNL OFFICE SHANKARVIHAR EXTENSION DEVARAJURS LAYOUT DAVANAGERE 577 003 DRIVER OF CAR BEARING NO. KA-64/A-0999. 5. DIVYA G.K. W/O GOVINDANAIKA GANTEPALI, AGE MAJOR R/O M. CHENNAPPA REDDY NERLKATTE, VENKATESHWARA POST PAVAGADA TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT 561 202 OWERN OF CAR NO. KA-64/A-0999. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R3 V/O/DTD:12.06.2023 NOTICE TO R1, R2 & R4 IS D/W R5 SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT DAVANGERE IN MVC 678/2019 DATED 08.11.2022 AND TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION FROM Rs.6,44,980/- to Rs.20,00,000/- BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL IN THE INTEREST OF EQUITY AND JUSTICE. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PART HEARD, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34764 M.F.A. No.477/2023 ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in M.V.C.No.678/2019 dated 08.11.2022 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM at Davanagere, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation and also questioning the apportionment of liability on the owner of the car as well as on the insurance company. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant. 2. It is the case of the claimant that on 29.09.2018 at about 04.30 p.m. he was going on the motorcycle of his relative as a pillion rider, at that time, the rider of the motorcycle rode the same in a high speed and dashed the car bearing Reg.No.KA-64-A-0999 going towards Mamas Joint road in a rash and negligent manner. Due to that, the claimant and his relative, who was the rider, fell on the road and sustained grievous injuries. The Tribunal, on the aspect of liability has held that admittedly, respondent Nos.2 & 3 are the owner & insurer of the motorcycle; respondent No.1 is the rider of the motorcycle and respondent No.4 is the driver of the car and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34764 M.F.A. No.477/2023 respondent No.5 is the owner of the car. It is an admitted fact that the car was not insured at the time of accident. By applying the principles of master and servant, the case against the rider of the motorcycle and the driver of the car is liable to be dismissed. Then, respondent No.2, the owner of the motorcycle, respondent No.3, the insurer of the motorcycle and respondent No.5, the owner of the car, are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. 3. But when it come to paragraph 30 of the judgment, the Tribunal observes that, neither the owner of the motorcycle nor the owner of the car, have challenged the charge sheet and as per the charge sheet, due to rash and negligent driving of the motorcycle rider and car driver, the accident has occurred, as such, the Court deemed fit that respondent No.3 & 5 i.e., insurer of motorcycle and owner of the car respectively, are liable to pay compensation awarded to the claimant in equal ratio of 50% and accordingly answered the issue. The Tribunal has granted the compensation as per the table given below: Heads Compensation Awarded 1. Loss of future earning : Rs. 5,61,000/- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34764 M.F.A. No.477/2023 capacity 2. Pain and sufferings : Rs. 30,000/- 3. Loss of amenities : Rs. 10,000/- 4. Food, nourishment and attendant charges : Rs. 15,000/- 5. Loss of income during laid up period : Rs. 4,587/- 6. Medical expenses : Rs. 2,940/- 7. Conveyance charges : Rs. 21,450/- TOTAL : Rs. 6,44,977/- 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant- claimant submits that when the Tribunal had already given a finding that respondent Nos.2, 3 & 5 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation; again in the next paragraph stating that respondent Nos.3 & 5 have to pay 50% compensation each, is not a correct finding. It is submitted that when they are joint tort-feasors, it is for the claimant to recover the amount and Court cannot fix such a liability at 50:50. It is submitted that the award passed by the Tribunal insofar as this issue is concerned needs to be interfered by this Court. 5. Then when it comes to the compensation, the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant submits that the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34764 M.F.A. No.477/2023 claimant had sustained a fracture of the femur. The Tribunal had granted only Rs.30,000/- under the head of pain and sufferings. It is submitted that for the loss of income during the laid-up period only an amount of Rs.4,587/- is awarded. It is submitted that the amount awarded by the Tribunal on all the heads is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent - insurance company submits that the Tribunal had rightly granted the compensation, in fact, the compensation that is awarded by the Tribunal on all the counts is on the higher side and it requires no interference. Learned counsel further submits that already the execution petition is filed by the appellant- petitioner against the owner of the car, in those circumstances, the order that is passed by the Tribunal holds good and the insurance company will pay their 50% of the compensation. 7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on either side, perused the entire material on record. First coming to the aspect of liability, there is no dispute about the fact that because of the rash and negligent driving of both the driver of the car and of the rider of the motorcycle the accident has - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34764 M.F.A. No.477/2023 taken place and the charge sheet is filed on both the driver of the car and the rider of the motorcycle. In those circumstances, both of them are the joint tort-feasors. In those circumstances, it is for the claimant to proceed against them jointly or against any one of them. When 50% liability is fixed on each of them, when the appellant-claimant wants to proceed against the insurance company, the insurance company shall pay the entire compensation and 50% compensation can be recovered from the owner of the car. Already the execution proceedings are initiated by the claimant before the executing Court against the owner of the car and the insurance company can also join the said execution proceedings. 8. Then coming to the aspect of compensation, considering one grievous injury sustained by the claimant, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.40,000/- under the head of pain and suffering. Considering the fact that the accident had taken place in the year 2018, the notional income is taken at Rs.12,500/- per month and for three months under the head of loss of income during laid-up period, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.37,500/- (Rs.12,500 X 3). Then the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34764 M.F.A. No.477/2023 compensation awarded under the heads of loss of future earning capacity of Rs.5,61,000/-, loss of amenities at Rs.10,000/-, food, nourishment & attendant charges at Rs.15,000/-, medical expenses of Rs.2,940/-, conveyance charges of Rs.21,450/-, this Court finds no reasons to interfere with the same. 9. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala vs. M. Malathi and Another1, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. 10. The claimant is therefore, entitled to the compensation under the following heads: Heads Compensation Awarded by the Tribunal Compensation awarded by this Court 1. Loss of future earning capacity : Rs. 5,61,000/- 5,61,000/- 2. Pain and sufferings : Rs. 30,000/- 40,000/- 3. Loss of amenities : Rs. 10,000/- 10,000/- 4. Food, nourishment and : Rs. 15,000/- 15,000/- 1 (2014) 11 SCC 178 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34764 M.F.A. No.477/2023 attendant charges 5. Loss of income during laid up period : Rs. 4,587/- 37,500/- 6. Medical expenses : Rs. 2,940/- 2,940/- 7. Conveyance charges : Rs. 21,450/- 21,450/- 8. Legal expenses : Rs. 10,000/- TOTAL : Rs. 6,44,977/- 6,97,890/- Enhancement : Rs. 52,913/- 11. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimant is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.6,44,977/- to Rs.6,97,890/-. i) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. ii) The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Tribunal. iii) The respondent - insurance company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the enhanced compensation amount without furnishing any security. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34764 M.F.A. No.477/2023 iv) The respondent - insurance company is at liberty to join the pending execution proceedings and recover 50% of the compensation from respondent No.5 - owner of the car. v) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. vi) No costs. vii) Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1