- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11708 MFA No. 103101 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103101 OF 2016 BETWEEN: 1. SUNIL S/O SHRISHAILAPPA HULAMANI, AGE:29 YEARS, OCC:AGRICULTURE, R/O: CHACHADI, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. SRINIVAS B. NAIK, ADV) AND: 1. NINGAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA KODAKERI, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: H.NO. 7, PUMPHOUSE, 3RD NUMBER GATE HALYAL ROAD, DANDELI, DIST: KARWAR. 2. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., ICICI LOMBARD HOUSE, 414, VEERASAVARKAR MARG, NEAR SIDDIVINAYAK TEMPLE, PRABHADEVI, MUMBAI-400025, NOW AT RAMADEV GALLI, BELAGAVI. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADV FOR R2, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED:29.01.2016, PASSED IN MVC. NO.2619/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER ADDL. MACT, BAILHONGAL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER : MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.15 17:47:29 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11708 MFA No. 103101 of 2016 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) 1. This Appeal is filed by the petitioner, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bailhongal, vide judgment and award dated 29.01.2006 in MVC No. 2619 of 2013. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: The petitioner met with an accident on 15.10.2012, while he was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing Reg. No. KA- 31/H-5790. The driver of the Omni Car bearing Reg. No. 31/M-5637 came at a high speed ina rash and negligent manner and dashed agsint the petitioner9s motorcycle. As a result, the petitioner suffered a grievous injuries Hence, he filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation. Accordingly, prays to allow the petition. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11708 MFA No. 103101 of 2016 3. A Notice was issued to the owner of the car. Despite the service of a notice, he remained unrepresented and was placed exparte. 4. The insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving licence as of the date of the accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company. 5. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 6. The petitioner, to substantiate his case, examined himself as PW1, examined the Doctor as PW2 and marked 21 documents as Exhibits P1 to P-21. The respondents have not led any oral evidence however, marked one document as Exhibit R1 with the consent. 7. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgement dated 29.01.2016 and awarded a compensation of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11708 MFA No. 103101 of 2016 ¹2,89,000 with current and future interest at the rate of 9% per annum on ¹2,64,000/- from the date of the petition till its realisation. 8. The petitioner, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, filed this appeal. 9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned counsel for the insurance company. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Accordingly, prays to enhance the compensation by allowing the appeal. 11. The Learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and do not call for any interference by this court. Accordingly, prays to dismiss the appeal. 12. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11708 MFA No. 103101 of 2016 13. The point that would arise for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation. 14. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident, the injuries sustained by the petitioner and the accident having occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. The petitioner has produced a chargesheet marked at Ex.P7 which discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. 15. Regarding quantum: The petitioner contended that he is an agriculturist and owns land, and gets an income of more than ¹10,000/- per month. The Tribunal taking into consideration that the petitioner is an agriculturist has assessed the income at ¹7,000/- per month. The insurance company has not challenged the findings recorded by the Tribunal. The petitioner examined the doctor as PW2 who has deposed that he has examined the petitioner clinically and radiologically and issued a disability certificate marked as Exhibit P.19. He has opined that the petitioner has suffered a - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11708 MFA No. 103101 of 2016 permanent physical disability to an extent of 40% whereas, the Tribunal has taken the disability at 11%. Considering the overall evidence of the doctor and the medical records, this Court reassess the disability at 15% to the whole body. The petitioner was aged 34 years old as of the date of the accident and the multiplier applicable to his age group is 16. Accordingly, this Court re-assess the compensation as follows: 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 Loss of amenities 20,000/- 30,000/- 3 Medical expenses 3,000/- 3,000/- 4 Incidental charges 20,000/- 20,000/- 5 Loss of income during laid up period (7000x3(months)) 28,000/- 29,400/- 6 Future medical expenses 25,000/- 25,000/- 7 Loss of future income (9,800 (40%)x12x16x15%) 1,48,000/- 2,82,240/- TOTAL 2,89,000/- 4,49,640/- Enhanced compensation 1,60,640/- 16. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of ¹4,49,640/- as against ¹2,89,000/- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11708 MFA No. 103101 of 2016 awarded by the Tribunal. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of ¹1,60,640/-. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The Appeal is allowed. ii. The judgment and award dated 29.01.2006 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bailhongal, in MVC No. 2619 of 2013, is hereby modified. iii. The petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of ¹1,60,640/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till its realisation. iv. The insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation amount within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Draw the award accordingly. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE kmv CT: BSB