- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102454 OF 2019 C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102453 OF 2019 IN MFA NO. 102454 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. RAVINDRARAO H.B. S/O BHAVANAPPA AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: GOUNDI & AGRICULTURE, NOW NIL, R/O: HIREGONAGERI VILLAGE, TQ: HONNALLI, DIST: DAVANAGERE-577217. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. G.S HULMANI, ADV) AND: 1. BASAVANYAPPA P. S/O THIMMAPPA AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: MADENAHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: HONNALLI, DIST: DAVANAGERE-577223. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. ENKAY COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI-580020. &RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADV FOR R2 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.01.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.174/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. MACT, RANEBENNUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 IN MFA NO. 102453 OF 2019 BETWEEN: 1. ALLAMAPRABHU @ PRABHU MAJJIGERI S/O RAMAPPA, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: GOUNDI WORK, NOW NIL, R/O: MEDLERI VILLAGE, TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI-581115. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. G.S HULMANI, ADV) AND: 1. BASAVANYAPPA P S/O THIMMAPPA AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: MADENAHALLI VILLAGE, TQ: HONNALLI, DIST: DAVANAGERE-577223. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. ENKAY COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI-580020. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., S.S. SUDAMBI BUILDING, APMC ROAD, EASTERN EXTN, RANEBENNUR-581115 &RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADV FOR R2 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.01.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.173/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. MACT, RANEBENNUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) 1. These appeals are filed by the petitioners being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in the common judgment and award dated 01.01.2019 passed in MVC Nos.173/2017 and 174/2014 by the learned Principal Civil Judge and AMACT, Ranebennur. 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of these appeals are as follows: 3. On 03.06.2016 at about 04.00 p.m., the petitioner in MVC No.173/2007 was riding the motorcycle bearing registration number KA.17/EB.3125 and the petitioner in MVC 174/2007 was travelling as a pillion rider on the said motorcycle. When the motorcycle was near the accident spot, at that time, one Bolero pickup vehicle bearing registration No.KA.17/B-9451 came in a rash and negligent manner from the opposite direction and collided with the said motorcycle. As a result, a road traffic accident was occurred and the rider and the pillion rider sustained grievous injuries. Thus, they - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 filed the claim petitions under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act for compensation. 4. The owner of the offending vehicle filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petitions admitting that he is the owner of the offending vehicle. It is contended that the driver of the offending vehicle was possessing a valid and effective driving licence as of the date of the accident and the policy was valid from 12.11.2015 to 11.11.2016. Hence, the owner of the offending vehicle is not liable to pay the compensation and the insurance company is liable to indemnify the owner. On these grounds he prays to dismiss the petitions against him. 5. The insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petitions and held that the driver of the offending vehicle was not possessing a valid and effective driving licence as of the date of the accident and prays to dismiss the claim petitions. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 6. The Tribunal clubbed both claim petitions and framed the separate issues and additional issues. 7. The petitioners to substantiate their case, the petitioner in MVC No.173/2017 was examined as PW.1 and the petitioner in MVC No.174/2017 was examined was PW.2 and marked 24 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-24. in rebuttal, the officer of the insurance company was examined as RW.1 and marked 3 documents as Exs.R-1 to R-3. 8. The Tribunal after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petitions in part and awarded compensation of Rs.3,67,263/- in MVC No.173/2017 and Rs.6,50,464/- to the petitioner in MVC No.174/2017. 9. The petitioners dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, filed these appeals seeking for the enhancement of the compensation. 10. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the insurance company. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 11. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the compensation awarded and the disability assessed by the Tribunal are on the lower side. Hence, he prays to allow the appeals. 12. Per contra, learned counsel for the insurance company supported the impugned judgment and award contending that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and do not call for any interference. Hence, he prays to dismiss the appeals. 13. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 14. The point that would arise for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation. 15. There is no dispute about the occurrence of the accident and the injuries sustained by the petitioners. The petitioner in MVC No.173 of 2017, submits that he was aged 37 years, working as goundi and was earning ¹15,000/- per month. To prove that the petitioner has suffered a permanent - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 disability, examined the doctor as PW4, who has examined the petitioner and issued the disability certificate marked as Ex.P-12. He has deposed that the petitioner has suffered a permanent disability to the extent of 60% whereas the Tribunal has assessed the disability at 18 percent which is on the lower side. Considering the evidence of PW4 and the medical records, this Court reassess the disability at 22%. 16. The petitioner to prove the income has not produced any income proof. In the absence of income proof this Court has taken the notional income at ¹8,750/- per month as the accident is of the year 2016. The petitioner9s income is taken as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka Legal Services Authority. The petitioner was aged 37 years as of the date of accident and the multiplier applicable to his age group is 15. Thus, considering the entire evidence on record, this Court reassess the compensation under the following heads. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 Sl. No . Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs. Compensation re-assessed by this Court Rs. 1 Pain and suffering 45,000/- 70,000/- 2 Food, diet, nourishment and attendant charge 2,000/- 30,000/- 3 Medical expenses 73,463/- 73,463/- 4 Loss of income during laid up period - 35,000/- 5 Loss of future earning (8750x12x15x22% 2,26,800/- 3,46,500/- 6 Loss of amenities 20,000/- 50,000/- TOTAL Enhancement 2,37,700/- 3,67,263/- 6,04,963/- 17. Thus, the petitioner is entitled for total compensation of ¹6,04,963/- as against ¹3,67,263/- awarded by the Tribunal. 18. In MVC No.174/2017: The petitioner submits that he was working as a goundi and as an agriculturist. He was aged about 45 years as of the date of the accident and the, multiplier applied to his age group is 14. The petitioner to prove the disability examined the doctor as PW3. PW3 has examined the petitioner and she has deposed that the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 petitioner has taken treatment at KMS Hospital Manipal and stated that the petitioner was referred for assessing cognitive disability. She has stated that the petitioner was evaluated at NIMHANS Neuropsychological battery on 29.11.2017 which shows 56% of cognitive disability and she has issued disability certificate marked as Ex.P-17. She has opined that the petitioner has suffered 56% of cognitive disability. The Tribunal has assessed the disability at 18% which is on the lower side and further the petitioner has undergone multiple surgeries. Thus, considering the evidence of PW.3, this Court reassess the disability at 50% and the income of the petitioner is taken at Rs.8,750/- as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka Legal Services Authority. The petitioner is entitled for future prospects of 25%. 19. Considering the nature of the injuries and the evidence of the PW.3, this Court re-assess the compensation under the following heads: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 Sl. No . Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs. Compensation re-assessed by this Court Rs. 1 Pain and suffering 45,000/- 60,000/- 2 Food, nourishment, attendant charges 15,000/- 15,000/- 3 Medical expenses 3,39,784/- 3,39,784/- 4 Loss of future income (10,937x12x14x25%) 2,11,680/- 9,18,708/- 5. Loss of income during laid up period 14,000/- 17,500/- 6 Traveling expenses 10,000/- 15,000/- 7 Loss of amenities 15,000/- 25,000/- TOTAL 6,50,464/- 13,90,992/- 20. Thus, the petitioner is entitled for compensation of ¹13,90,992/- as against ¹6,50,464/- awarded by the Tribunal. The petitioner is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.7,40,528/-. 21. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12329 MFA No. 102454 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 102453 of 2019 ORDER i. The appeals are allowed in part. The judgment and award dated 01.01.2019 passed in MVC No.173/2017 and 174/2017 by the learned Principal Civil Judge and AMACT, Ranebennur, is hereby modified. ii. The petitioner in MVC No.173/2017 is entitled to total compensation of Rs.6,04,963/. The petitioner in MVC No.174/2017 is entitled to total compensation of Rs.13,90,992/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. iii. Rest of the judgment of the Tribunal remains intact. iv. The Office to draw the award accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE kmv CT: BSB