- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5201-DB MFA No. 202154 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 201741 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 202154 OF 2025 (MV-I) C/W MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201741 OF 2025(MV-I) IN MFA No.202154/2025: BETWEEN: SRI ANJANAYYA S/O. BHEEMAYYA @ SANTI BHEEMAYYA AGE 38 YEARS, OCC.AGRICULTURIST & TRACTOR DRIVER R/O. SINGANODI VILLAGE TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR – 584101. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. PATIL SHANTABAI SUBHASH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VENKATESH AGE MAJOR, OCC.KSRTC DRIVER BUS REG. NO. KA-36/F-1142 DEPOT RAICHUR, Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5201-DB MFA No. 202154 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 201741 of 2025 R/O. ASHAPUR VILLAGE TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR – 584101. 2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC DEPOT, RAICHUR TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR – 584101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MANJUNATH MALLAYYA SHETTY, ADV. FOR R2; V/O. DATED 01.08.2025, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.02.2025 PASSED BY THE II- ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AND MACT AT RAICHUR IN MVC NO. 175/2022 AND PLEASED TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. IN MFA No.201741/2025: BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC DEPOT, RAICHUR TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR. NOW REPRESENTED THROUGH BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SHARANABASAPPA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI ANJANAYYA S/O. BHEEMAYYA, BHEEMAYYA @ SANTI BHEEMAYYA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5201-DB MFA No. 202154 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 201741 of 2025 AGE 38 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE & TRACTOR DRIVER R/O. SINGANODI VILLAGE TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR-584102. 2. VENKATESH AGE MAJOR, OCC, KSRTC DRIVER BUS BRG REG. No.KA 36 F 1142, DEPOT, RAICHUR. R/O. ASHAPUR VILLAGE TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR-584104. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PATIL SHANTABAI SUBHASH, ADV. FOR R1; V/O. DATED 20.06.2025, NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WTIH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND CALL FOR THE TRIAL COURT RECORDS AND HEAR THE PARTIES AND SET ASIDE THE CHALLENGING JUDGMENT DATED 17-02-2025 AND AWARD DATED 28-02-2025 IN MVC NO.175/2022 BEFORE IN THE COURT OF II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AT RAICHUR, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THESE APPEALS ARE COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5201-DB MFA No. 202154 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 201741 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF) These two appeals being MFA No.202154/2025 and 201741/2025 are by the claimant/appellant and the Corporation, calling in question the judgment and award dated 17.02.2025 in MVC No.175/2022 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Raichur, only on the quantum of compensation. 2. The date of accident, involvement of vehicle, injury suffered and liability to pay compensation are not in dispute. The only dispute involved in these appeals are, for the claimant/appellant it is inadequate and for the appellant – Corporation, it is exorbitant compensation, awarded by the Tribunal. 3. Heard Smt. Patil Shanthabai Subhash, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in MFA No.202154/2025 and Sri Sharana Basappa M. Patil, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in MFA No.201741/2025. The notice of these appeals on respondent No.1 - driver of the Bus is dispensed with vide order dated 01.08.2025 in MFA No.202154/2025 and - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5201-DB MFA No. 202154 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 201741 of 2025 notice to respondent No.2 in MFA No.201741/202 is dispensed with, vide order 20.06.2025. 4. Smt. Patil Shantabai Subhash with all vehemence submits that, in the accident, the appellant has sustained severe injuries and was inpatient for 11 days. As per wound certificate – Ex.P6, he has suffered a crush injury or right lower limb, resulting in fracture of lower end of right femur, fracture of right tibia middle 1/3rd resultantly the right leg was was amputated above knee. As per the schedule contained in the Employees’ Compensation Act, the injury is classified as a scheduled injury. The amputation of the lower limb above the knee with a stump not exceeding 12.70 cm, the disability is assessed at 80%. The doctor who has treated the claimant has been examined as PW2, who has clearly stated the condition of the appellant and issued a disability certificate stating that there is 80% disability to the whole body. The Tribunal has taken the percentage of the disability at 80%, however, not added the Future prospectus in terms of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court and the amount of compensation awarded under the each head requires re-consideration and re- determination, except the one under the medical expenses. In - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5201-DB MFA No. 202154 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 201741 of 2025 these circumstances, sought to allow the appeal and enhance the compensation, dismissing the appeal by the Corporation. 5. Refuting the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Sharana Basappa M. Patil with all vehemence submits that the claim petition is filed under the MVC Act. The Tribunal has committed an error in taking the percentage of disability stated to by the doctor. The disability to a particular limb ought to have been taken at 1/3rd to the whole body. The Tribunal erred in considering the entire disability, as per the evidence of the doctor i.e., 80%, as such the same requires re-consideration. With this he sought to allow the appeal by the corporation and dismiss the appeal by the claimant. 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused both the appeal papers, so also the Trial Court Record, the point that would arise for our consideration is as follows: Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and appropriate, if or not whether the same requires interference at the hands of this Court ? - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5201-DB MFA No. 202154 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 201741 of 2025 7. Our answer to the above point of consideration is ‘partly in affirmative’ against the Corporation and in favour of the claimant for the following: REASONS 8. It is not in dispute that, in the accident, the appellant has suffered severe injuries resulting in amputation of right leg above knee with stump not exceeding 12.70 c.m. As per the schedule stated in the Employee Compensation Act 80% disability the same has been stated to amount earning capacity. The doctor after going through the entire material, clinical examination and going through the condition of the injured, has given an opinion that disability is at 80% and due to disability, claimant is not in a position to work and carry on his earlier avocation. Though the Tribunal has taken the disability at 80%, however, failed to add appropriate percentage of future prospectus towards future earning, considering the age of the appellant. In the case on hand, the appellant was aged 44 years as per Ex.P16 – Driving License, wherein his date of birth was shown as 02.07.1978 and the accident occurred on 17.01.2022. The claimant was inpatient - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5201-DB MFA No. 202154 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 201741 of 2025 for 11 days. The income is taken at Rs.14,750/- per month. The compensation under each head is on lower side when compared to the injury and disability sustained except medical expenses. The claimant entitled for compensation for purchase of artificial/prosthetic limb. Having considered the afore stated facts the disability at 80%, it is appropriate to add 25% to the income at Rs.14,750/-. 9. Accordingly, this Court proceed to reassess the compensation as follows: On re-determination, the appellant/claimant is entitled for Rs.33,80,100, which is rounded off to Rs.33,80,500/- as against Rs.22,79,400/- awarded by the Tribunal. The re- 1. Loss of future earning capacity [14,750 + 25% x 12 x 14 x 80/100] Rs.24,82,200/- 2. Pain and suffering Rs.1,25,000/- 3. Food and nourishment and attendant Rs.60,000/- 4. Loss of income during laid up period [14,750 x 6] Rs.88,500/- 5. Medical expenses Rs.2,24,400/- 6. Future medical expenses (purchase of prosthetic/artificial limb) Rs.3,00,000/- 7. Loss of amenities Rs.1,00,000/- Total Rs.33,80,100 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5201-DB MFA No. 202154 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 201741 of 2025 determined compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. 10. For the forgoing reasons, we answered the point for consideration stated above and proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal filed by the appellant - Corporation in MFA No.201741/2025 is dismissed. ii) The amount deposit shall be transmitted forthwith to the concerned Tribunal for payment by disbursement. iii) The appeal in MFA No.202154/2025 is partly allowed, modifying the judgment and award dated 17.02.2025 in MVC No.175/2022 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Raichur, re-determined compensation at Rs.33,80,500/-, which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a from the date of petition till realization iv) The respondent – Corporation shall deposit the balance re-determined compensation along with accrued interest supra, within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5201-DB MFA No. 202154 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 201741 of 2025 v) On deposit, 70% of the award amount with accrued interest be invested in an interest bearing Fixed Deposit of any nationalized bank, for an initial period of 5 years with renewable clause of 3 years thereafter. vi) Balance 30% of the award amount with accrued interest shall be released in favour of the appellant/claimant on proper identification. vii) The bank shall not permit any loan on the said deposit amount without any order by the concerned Court/Tribunal. viii) No order as to cost. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE THM/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43/CT:JLR