- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4766 MFA No. 100799 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.100799 OF 2014 (MV) BETWEEN: DADASAB ABDULMAJEED MATTIKOPPA, AGE: 82 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: SAMPAGAON, TALUKA: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SANTOSH S. HATTIKATAGI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SANTOSH B. RAWOOT, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRIKANT S/O. MALLAPPA KURER, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: GANDIGAWAD, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INSURANCE CO. LTD., HAVING ITS OFFICE, MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.C. JAINAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 – SERVICE OF NOTICE DISPENSED WITH.) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE III ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE AND M.A.C.T.-IV, BELAGAVI, IN MVC NO.2068/2011 DATED 07.10.2013 AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR IN THE CLAIM PETITION, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4766 MFA No. 100799 of 2014 THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA) The present appeal is filed by the claimant calling in question the judgment and award dated 07.10.2013, passed in MVC No.2068/2011, by the III Addl. District Judge and Addl. MACT-IV, Belagavi1. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their rank before the Tribunal. 3. The factual matrix in brief leading to the present appeal is that on 13.10.2010 when the claimant was proceeding in a TATA 407 vehicle bearing registration No.KA- 24/1041 on Itagi-Tolagi Road, a Trax vehicle bearing registration No.KA-31/M-1431 came from opposite direction and hit the vehicle of the claimant causing the accident in question. Claiming compensation for the damages caused to the vehicle, the claim petition is filed arraying the owner and insurer of the offending Trax vehicle bearing 1 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’ - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4766 MFA No. 100799 of 2014 No.KA-31/M-1431 as respondents No.1 and 2 respectively before the Tribunal. 4. The Tribunal by its judgment and award dated 07.10.2013, partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of ₹40,000/- together with interest at 6% p.a., and directed the 2nd respondent-insurer to deposit the compensation awarded. Being aggrieved, the claimant has filed the above appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 5. Learned counsel Sri Santosh S. Hattikatagi, for the appellant/claimant submits that although the claimant has produced the necessary bills as Ex.P7 and examined PW.4, the Tribunal has awarded a lump sum amount of ₹40,000/-. Hence, he seeks for enhancement of compensation awarded. 6. Per contra, learned counsel Sri S.C.Jainar, appearing for the 2nd respondent contends that the claimant has not adduced any evidence with regard to loss of income. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4766 MFA No. 100799 of 2014 Further, the Tribunal has scrutinized the material on record and awarded compensation, which is just and proper. 7. The submissions of both the learned counsels have been considered and the material on record including the records of the Tribunal have been perused. The only question that arises for consideration is, whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is liable to be enhanced? 8. The finding of the Tribunal on negligence and liability is not under challenge and have attained finality. 9. In the claim petition, the claimant has averred that the vehicle has been damaged and he has incurred a sum of ₹1,10,000/-. It is further averred that the damaged vehicle was shifted to Trimurthi Guarage, Belagavi, through another hired vehicle and that the damages were repaired. The claimant examined himself as PW.1 and he has reiterated the averments made in the claim petition. 10. Various bills and receipts have been produced as Ex.P7. PW.4 has been examined who has stated that he - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4766 MFA No. 100799 of 2014 carries on business of body building work and that he has repaired the damaged vehicle. PW.4 has further deposed that there is a bill for ₹49,600/- containing 12 spare parts, which is issued by him and he has replaced some of the parts by asking the claimant to purchase the same. He has deposed that he has issued a bill for ₹91,584/- including the bill for ₹49,600/-. 14 bills are marked as Ex.P7. A perusal of the same discloses that there is a bill for ₹20,500/-. The Trimurthi Guarage has issued a quotation for ₹49,600/-. However, there is no document to show payment of the said quotation. Few other bills for having purchased some of the spare parts are produced. Considering the same, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of ₹40,000/-. 11. The claimant has also claimed some amount towards loss of business during the period when the vehicle was being repaired. However, the Tribunal has recorded a finding that since the claimant has not adduced any evidence regarding the loss suffered by him during the period when the vehicle was being repaired, no compensation has been awarded. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4766 MFA No. 100799 of 2014 12. Admittedly, the vehicle has sustained damages and for some period the same was being repaired and the claimant would not have used the same and he would have suffered some loss towards the same. Hence, having regard to the overall factual matrix of the matter, it is just and proper that a further sum of ₹15,000/- be awarded in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, the question framed for consideration is answered in the affirmative. 13. In view of the aforementioned, the following: ORDER i. The above appeal is allowed in part; ii. The judgment and award dated 07.10.2013, passed in MVC No.2068/2011, by the III Addl. District Judge and Addl. MACT-IV, Belagavi, is modified to the extent stated herein; iii. The claimant is entitled for additional compensation of ₹15,000/- together with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till date of - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4766 MFA No. 100799 of 2014 realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal; iv. In all other aspects, the judgment and award of the Tribunal remain unaltered; v. Registry to draw modified award accordingly. vi. Records of the tribunal to be returned forthwith. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE MRK CT: UMD. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33