- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3832 OF 2025(MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3798 OF 2025(MV-I), MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3895 OF 2025(MV-I) IN MFA No. 3832/2025: BETWEEN: GIRISH C., S/O. CHALUVARAJ, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT KADAKOLA VILLAGE, JAIPURA HOBLI, MYSURU -571 311. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SREENIVASAN M.Y., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MANJUNATH M., S/O. MARISWAMY, MAJOR IN AGE, R/AT NEGGALAHALLI VILLAGE, HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573 165. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, HDFC ERGO GENERAL-INSURANCE CO. LTD., 2ND FLOOR, BHEEMA AND BROTHERS BUILDING, B M ROAD, OPP TO KSRTC BUS STAND, MYSURU-570 001, …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (VK NOT FILED); NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.01.2025 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1529/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE, ADDITIONAL COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AS A PRESIDING OFFICER, MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 3798/2025: BETWEEN: JUNAIS, S/O. AZEES, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.15/106, PANCHAYATHU COLONY, DEVARSHOLAI GUDALR NILGIRIS, TAMILNADU-643 207. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. SREENIVASAN M. Y.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MANJUNATH M., S/O MARISWAMY, R/AT NEGGALAHALLI VILLAGE, HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573165. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, HDFC ERGO GENERAL-INSURANCE CO. LTD., 2ND FLOOR, BHEEMA AND BROTHERS BUILDING, B M ROAD, OPP TO KSRTC BUS STAND, MYSURU-570 001. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.01.2025 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1528/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE, ADDITIONAL COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AS A PRESIDING OFFICER, MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 IN MFA NO. 3895/2025: BETWEEN: MOHAMMED AJMAL A., S/O. JAMEELA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/AT NO.3/63G MACHIKOLLY, DEVARSHOLAI, GUDALUR, DEARASHOLA HILGIRIS, TAMILNADU- 643 207. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. SREENIVASAN M. Y., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MANJUNATH M., S/O. MARISWAMY, MAJOR IN AGE, R/AT BNEGGALAHALLI VILLAGE, HOLENARASIPURA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT-573165. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, HDFC ERGO GENERAL-INSURANCE CO. LTD., 2ND FLOOR, BHEEMA AND BROTHERS BUILDING, B. M. ROAD, OPP TO KSRTC BUS STAND, MYSURU-570 001. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.01.2025 PASSED IN MVC NO.1530/2023 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES AND SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT FOR COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT IN MFA.No.3798/2025: Aggrieved by the order passed in M.V.C.No.1528/2023 dated 21.01.2025 by the Court of Additional Small Causes and Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mysuru, the appellant/claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant in the accident. The Tribunal by order impugned had granted compensation of an amount of Rs.6,67,000/- and held that the respondent- insurance company is liable to pay the compensation. 2. It is the case of the claimant that on 06.07.2023 at about 01:30 p.m., when the claimant was traveling as inmate in a Santro car from Mysuru towards Nanjangud, when they reached near Kadakola Industrial Area junction, at that time, the driver of the Tata Lorry - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 has parked the same negligently without indication, resulting which the driver of the car dashed to the hind side of the lorry. Due to the impact, the claimant sustained injuries all over the body. Immediately, he was shifted to the hospital and was treated as inpatient. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that the appellant had sustained multiple facial fracture, left iliac bone fracture, 9th and 10th left ribs fracture and the Tribunal has awarded meager compensation under the head of pain and suffering. The doctor has assessed the disability at 31%, but the Court has not considered the disability. The Court had taken 16,000/- p.m. as income when he was earning Rs.25,000/- p.m. It is submitted that the compensation needs to be enhanced. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the insurance company submits that the Tribunal infact has granted the compensation on the higher side and there are no grounds to interfere with the well reasoned order passed by the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 Tribunal. It is submitted that under the head of pain and suffering Court had already granted Rs.1,50,000/- and under the head loss of amenities an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was granted and towards loss of earnings also an amount of Rs.32,000/- was granted and he submits that no interference is called for with the well reasoned order. 5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. This Court has perused the order passed by the Court and the Tribunal had already granted an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- under the head of pain and suffering and even under all other heads also the compensation that is granted by the Tribunal is well considered one and no interference is called for. Accordingly, MFA No.3798/2025 deserves to be dismissed. IN MFA.No.3895/2025: 6. Aggrieved by the order passed in M.V.C.No.1530/2023 dated 21.01.2025 by the Court of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 Additional Small Causes and Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mysuru, the appellant/claimant is before this Court seeking for enhancement of compensation. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant in the accident. The Tribunal by order impugned had granted compensation of an amount of Rs.8,95,600/-. 7. It is the case of the claimant that on 06.07.2023 at about 01:30 p.m., when the claimant was traveling as inmate in a Santro car from Mysuru towards Nanjangud, when they reached near Kadakola Industrial Area junction, at that time, the driver of the Tata Lorry has parked the same negligently without indication, resulting which the driver of the car dashed to the hind side of the lorry. Due to the impact, the claimant sustained injuries all over the body. Immediately, he was shifted to the hospital and was treated as inpatient. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 8. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that the Tribunal had failed to grant just and reasonable compensation for the injuries sustained by the claimant under all heads and that needs to be enhanced. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent- insurance company submits that already the Tribunal had granted adequate compensation infact the compensation that is awarded is on higher side and there is no interference to call for. 10. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. This Court has perused the order passed by the Tribunal and for the injuries sustained by the claimant, the compensation that is awarded by the Tribunal under the head of pain and suffering is Rs.1,00,000/- and for the loss of earnings an amount of Rs.3,45,600/- is granted and for loss of amenities an amount of Rs.50,000/- is granted and for future medical expenses also an amount of Rs.20,000/- is granted. Considering that the order - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 passed by the Tribunal is a reasoned order, no interference is called for. Accordingly, MFA No.3895/2025 deserves to be dismissed. IN MFA.No.3832/2025: 11. Aggrieved by the order passed in M.V.C.No.1529/2023 dated 21.01.2025 by the Court of Additional Small Causes and Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mysuru, the appellant/claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation and also questioning the contributory negligence that is fixed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal had granted total compensation of an amount of Rs.9,41,200/- and in that Court has fixed 50% contributory negligence on the claimant and awarded an amount of Rs.4,70,600/-. 12. It is the case of the claimant that on 06.07.2023 at about 01:30 p.m., when the claimant was proceeding in his Santro car along with inmates from Mysuru towards Nanjangud, when they reached near Kadakola Industrial Area junction, at that time, the driver - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 of the Tata Lorry has parked the same negligently without indication, resulting which the claimant dashed his car to the hind side of the lorry. Due to the impact, the claimant sustained injuries all over the body. Immediately, he was shifted to the hospital and was treated as inpatient. 13. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that the Tribunal without any basis had fixed the contributory negligence at 50% on the claimant and 50% on the respondent. It is submitted that the Tribunal has failed to look at the documents that are produced by the appellant/claimant. It is submitted that the Tribunal has observed that the accident has occurred on equal negligence on the part of claimant as well as the driver of the offending vehicle. There is no such material before the Court to come to such conclusion that 50% contributory negligence is on the part of the claimant. It is submitted that the compensation that is awarded by the Tribunal needs to be enhanced. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 14. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal had rightly considered and held that there is 50% negligence on behalf of the claimant as well as respondent. He submits that compensation that is awarded by the Tribunal is already on higher side and no interference is called for and no enhancement is required. 15. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. It is the case of the insurance company that the accident did not occur due to the sole negligence on the driver of the offending vehicle, but it is also due to the contributory negligence on the part of the claimant who hit the parked lorry from hind side. The insurance company examined the branch manager who deposed that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the claimant by hitting the parked lorry from hind side and basing on this the Court had fixed the contributory negligence at 50% on both claimant as well as the respondent. The accident had - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 taken at 1.30 a.m. and admittedly, no parking lights were on. 16. In these circumstances, this Court is of the view that fixing the contributory negligence on the claimant at 50% is on the higher side. Hence, the same is apportioned at 25% on the claimant and 75% on the respondent. Then coming to the compensation, under all the heads the contribution that is awarded by the Tribunal is reasonable compensation and this Court do not find any reasons to enhance the compensation. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimant is partly allowed whereby the contributory negligence is apportioned at 25% on the claimant and 75% on the respondent. The tribunal has awarded the compensation as per the table given below: Sl. No Heads Amount of Rs. 1 Loss of earnings/future earnings on account of disability Rs.3,07,200 2 Loss of earning during laid up period Rs.80,000 3 Damages for pain, suffering and Trauma as a consequence Rs.1,00,000 - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 of this injuries 4 Loss of Amenities Rs.50,000 5 Transportation, Nourishment, Attendant and Miscellaneous Expenditure Rs.35,000 6 Expenses relating to Treatment, Hospitalization and Medication Rs.3,49,000 7 Future medical expenses Rs.20,000 50% deducted towards the contributory negligence of the petitioner -Rs.4,70,600 The petitioner is entitled to Rs.4,70,600 17. 75% of 9,41,200/- is Rs.7,05,900/-. The Insurance Company is liable to pay an amount of Rs.7,05,900/-. 18. Accordingly, MFA No.3798/2025 and MFA No.3895/2025 filed by the claimants are dismissed. 19. Accordingly, MFA No.3832/2025 filed by the claimant is partly allowed and the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.7,05,900/-. i) The apportionment of contributory negligence is fixed at 25% on the claimant - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24862 MFA No. 3832 of 2025 C/W MFA No. 3798 of 2025 MFA No. 3895 of 2025 and 75% on the respondent No.2/Insurance company and the Insurance Company is liable to pay an amount of Rs.7,05,900/-. ii) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. iii) The respondent No.2-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 entire amount without furnishing any security. iv) No costs. v) Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE NS CT:TSM List No.: 2 Sl No.: 43