- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6437 OF 2014(MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6436 OF 2014(MV-I) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6438 OF 2014(MV-I) IN MFA No. 6437/2014 BETWEEN: 1. SRI K.GURUMURTHY, S/O SRI KATTARANGAPPA, AGE:34 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER, R/O HOSAKUNDOOR, AVALIPALYA, HOSADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 501. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SURESH M.LATUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AT AND T COMMUNICATION SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., GROUND FLOOR, TOWER C, THE MILLENIA, NO.1 AND 2 MURPHY ROAD, ULSOOR, HAL 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560 008. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 NO.31, GROUND FLOOR, T.B.R.TOWER, 1ST CROSS, NEW MISSION ROAD, NEXT TO JAIN COLLEGE, BENGALURU STOCK EXCHANGE, J. C. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. O.MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2, VIDE ORDER DATED 21.01.2015, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.08.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.5949/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, & XXVIII ACMM, MOTOR VEHICLES ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU. IN MFA NO. 6436/2014 BETWEEN: 1. SRI RAJANNA @ RAJAPPA S/O SRI LAKSHMANAPPA, AGE 44 YEARS, OCC: TEACHER, R/O NO.12, AVALIPALYA, HOSADURGA TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 501. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. SURESH M.LATUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AT AND T COMMUNICATION SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., GROUND FLOOR, TOWER-C, THE MILLENIA, NO.1 AND 2 MURPHY ROAD, ULSOOR, HAL 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560 008. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 NO.31, GROUND FLOOR, T.B.R. TOWER, 1ST CROSS, NEW MISSION ROAD, NEXT TO JAIN COLLEGE, BENGALURU STOCK EXCHANGE, J. C. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 002. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. O MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2, VIDE ORDER DATED 21.01.2015, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.08.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.5948/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & XXVIII ACMM, MOTOR VEHICLES ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU. IN MFA NO. 6438/2014 BETWEEN: 1. SRI CHANNABASAPPA K S/O SRI KOTTARAPPA, AGED 44 YEARS, OCC:TEACHER, R/O NO.41, KYATHANAHALLI, ARASIKERE, HASSAN -573 126. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. SURESH M.LATUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR AT AND T COMMUNICATION SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., GROUND FLOOR, TOWER-C, THE MILLENIA, NO.1 AND 2 MURPHY ROAD, ULSOOR, HAL 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU-560 008. 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER, BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 NO.31, GROUND FLOOR, T.B.R. TOWER, 1ST CROSS, NEW MISSION ROAD, NEXT TO JAIN COLLEGE, BENGALURU STOCK EXCHANGE, J. C. ROAD, BENGALURU-560 002. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. O MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2, VIDE ORDER DATED 22.01.2015, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED01.08.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.5950/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, & XXVIII ACMM, MOTOR VEHICLES ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU. THESE APPEALS, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 04.06.2025, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA CAV JUDGMENT All the above appeals arises out of the common judgment and award dated 01.08.2014 passed in MVC.No.5948/2012, 5949/12 and 5950/2012 respectively by the II Additional Small Causes Judge and MACT, Bengaluru (for short 'the Tribunal'). - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 2. The claimants in all the above three petitions were traveling on a motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-18-Q- 8988 from Mysuru to Arasikere road and near Thalalur gate, they met with an accident by the car bearing registration No.KA-51-Z-9395 coming from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner. As a result, all the three riders of the motor cycle fell down and sustained grievous injuries. They underwent medical treatment and have suffered from permanent disability. For these reasons, they prayed for award of compensation. 3. The claimant in MVC.No.5948/2012 filed MFA 6436/2014, claimant in MVC.No.5949/2012 filed MFA.No.6437/2014 and claimant in MVC.No.5950/2012 filed MFA.NO.6438/2014 challenging the judgment and award passed in the Tribunal. 4. Respondent No.1 is the owner of the car. Respondent No.2 is the insurer of the car. Respondent No.2 filed objections in all the three cases. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 5. The objections of the respondents in all the three cases are more or less similar. The respondent denied the contentions of the claim petitioner and further contended that accident occurred due to the negligence of the rider of the motor cycle. Therefore, respondent is not liable to pay the compensation and denies its liability to pay the said compensation. 6. The Tribunal on the basis of contentions of the parties, framed necessary issues. 7. The Tribunal clubbed all the three matters and recorded common evidence. The claimants to prove their case examined seven witnesses as PWs-1 to 7 and got marked 46 documents at Exs.P1 to P46. Respondent No.2 examined one witness as RW-1 and marked documents as Exs.R1 and R2. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties and considering the contentions, held that accident took place due to contributory negligence of driver of the car as well as rider of the motor cycle. It apportioned negligence in the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 ratio of 80:20 (i.e. 80% on the driver of the car and 20% on the rider of the motor cycle). The Tribunal awarded compensation and held that out of the compensation amount claimants are entitled only to 80% in all the three cases. The same is challenged in the present appeals, for enhancement of the compensation. 8. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for both the sides. 9. The following question arises for my determination:- i. Whether the Tribunal erred in holding that accident took place due the composite negligence of driver of car as well as rider of the motor cycle instead of holding that entire negligence was of the driver of the car? ii. Whether the claimants are entitled to enhancement of the compensation? iii. What Order? - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 10. Point No.1 - PWs-1 to 3 are claimants in the above said MVC. In the above said case, they have stated about the rash and negligent driving of the car by its driver. They admitted that three persons were riding on the said motor cycle, and Channabasappa was driving the same. The Tribunal, in the impugned judgment at paragraph No.11, after giving detailed reason held that the accident occurred due to the composite negligence of the rider of the motor cycle as well as the driver of the car and apportioned in the ratio of 20:80 respectively. It is pertinent to note that it was the case of head on collusion. The car came from the opposite direction on a straight road and hit the motor cycle. Looking at the facts and circumstances, the finding of the Tribunal is that the accident took place due to composite negligence of driver of the car and rider of the motor cycle and apportionment of the negligence does not call for any interference. 11. The claimants in MFA.No.5948/2012 and 5949/2012 were the pillion riders. In their cross examination, - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 it was not established that they had contributed to the accident in question. Moreover, it was admitted that the person riding the motor cycle was Channabasappa i.e. claimant in MVC.No.5950/2012. The two pillion riders sustained injuries due to composite negligence of driver of both the vehicles. Therefore, the findings of the Tribunal that accident occurred due to contributory negligence of all the three riders is incorrect. Therefore, the deduction of 20% from the amount compensation awarded in MVC.No.5948 and 5949 are incorrect. 12. In the case of Mohammed Siddique & Another. Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. & Others1 decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court is aptly application to the facts of the present case. In that case three riders were going on a motor cycle. Considering the facts and circumstances, it was held that the pillion riders cannot be held guilty of contributory negligence on the ground of triple riding. To that extent, findings of the Tribunal needs modification. 1 2020 ACJ 751 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 Point No.2: Determination of compensation: (in all the cases) MFA.No.5948/2012 The claimant has sustained the following injuries:- i. Bruised wound on the left side of the abdomen ii. abrasion on the right leg. iii. Abrasion on right knee iv. Laceration measuring 2x 1 inch on the inside of the left knee joint. v. Cut injury of mesocolon of sigmold colon, which is part of the intestine was filled with blood in stomach. vi. Pubic symphysis was separated. vii. Displaced comminuted, segmental fracture of left tibia and fibula. 13. It is noted that Sl.No.1 to 4 are simple injuries and 5 to 7 are grievous in nature. The medical records are produced by the claimants in support of the said contention. X-ray of the claimant is also produced. PW-5 corroborates the said injuries in his evidence. He assessed the disability of the claimant at 32.3% to the left lower limb and 16% to the whole body. PW-6 is Secretary of Siddalingeshwara Swamy Vidyasamsthe, Taraluru, Arasikere, Hassan District, deposed that all the three claimants were serving as teachers in the - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 school run by the aforementioned institution and were receiving salary of Rs.15,000/- per month. He produced certificates to that effect, which is marked at Ex.P-10, Ex.P-23 and Ex.P19 respectively. The Tribunal upon appreciating the said evidence, held that the claimant has suffered disability to an extent of 16% to the whole body. When the disability of particular limb is to be converted into whole body disability, one-third of the same shall be taken. Accordingly, his disability to the whole body is around 10%. Considering the other injuries noted above, the Tribunal might have assessed the disability to an extent of 16% to the whole body. 14. The Tribunal did not accept the contention of the claimant that he was serving as a teacher and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. On the contrary, it assessed the notional income at Rs.6,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that after the accident, they left job and that it was not a permanent job. Therefore, they did not press the contention that they were serving as teachers and was earning Rs.15,000/- as a salary. On the contrary, their - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 contention that the notional income taken by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Said submission is tenable. Following the notional income chart prepared by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the income of the claimant is taken as Rs.7,000/- per month. The age stated by the claimant is about 42 years. Considering the same, the Tribunal has rightly applied multiplier as '14'. 15. Looking at the contentions of the claimant and materials placed on record, the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal were on the lower side, which requires enhancement. Accordingly, the compensation is re- calculated and following amount of compensation is awarded: Compensation under different Heads As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) As awarded by this Court (Rs.) Injury pain and sufferings 45,000 70,000 Loss of earning during treatment. (Rs.7,000x3) 18,000 21,000 Medical expenses 1,37,531 1,37,531 Loss of future income(Rs.7,000x12x14x16% ) 1,61,280 1,88,160 Loss of amenities 20,000 40,000 - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 Conveyance, nourishment, food and attendant charges 19,000 25,000 Future medical expenses 25,000 25,000 Total Rs.4,25,811/- 5,06,691/- Awarded by the Tribunal without deducting 20% Rs.4,05,353/- Enhanced amount Rs.80,880/- Rounded off 81,000/- The claimant is entitled to enhancement of Rs.81,000/-. (owner and insurer of offending motor cycle are not party and claimants being third party can recover this from any of Joint tortfeasors. Hence, respondents are liable to pay the same. IN MFA.NO.5949/2012 16. Learned counsel for the claimants contended that injuries mentioned and disability of the claimant were taken properly. The Tribunal has assessed the income of the claimant as Rs.6,000/- per month, which is on the lower side. Assessing reasonable income compensation may be recalculated. The amount of compensation awarded - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 under other heads are on the lower side. Therefore, prayed to enhancement of the same. 17. Exs.P20 and Ex-P21 are wound certificates, Injuries sustained by the claimant are noted in them. PW-5 in his evidence, has stated about the disability of the claimant which was considered by the Tribunal and it is not disputed. The income of the claimant is taken as Rs.7,000/- per month. The Tribunal taken disability to the whole body as 11%; his age as 32 years and multiplier as '16'. They are not disputed. 18. For the above said discussion, the following amount of compensation is recalculated and awarded as under: Compensation under different Heads As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) As awarded by this Court (Rs.) Injury pain and sufferings 30,000 35,000 Loss of earning during treatment. (Rs.7,000x2) 12,000 14,000 Medical expenses 35,019 35,019 Loss of future income(Rs.7,000x12x16x11%) 1,26,720 1,47,840 Loss of amenities 10,000 25,000 Conveyance, nourishment, food and attendant charges 14,000 20,000 - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 Future medical expenses 10,000 10,000 Total Rs.2,37,739/- 2,86,859/- Enhanced amount Rs.49,120/- Rounded off Rs.49,000/- IN MFA.NO.5950/2012 19. According to Exs.P14 and 15, the claimant has sustained the following injuries: i. Commuted fracture shaft of right femur. ii. Fracture neck of right femur. iii. Crush injury right foot. Right big tow and 2nd toe were disarticulated(amputated) at Metatarsophalyngeal joint. The displace fracture at Ex.P17 shows that toe next to big toe was removed, but medical report does not support the said contention. PW-5 in his evidence has stated about the said injuries and also about the removal of toe next to big toe in the right feet. He assessed the permanent disability as 33.5% to the whole body. 20. The learned counsel for the claimant contended that the Tribunal has taken income on the lower side. The disability is also not taken properly. The Tribunal has taken permanent - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 disability at 26% to the whole body instead of 33.50% as stated by PW-5. The amount of compensation awarded on other heads are on the lower side. Therefore, prayed to enhance the compensation. 21. The Tribunal has taken income of the claimant as Rs.6,000/- per month. As discussed in other case stated above, the income of the claimant is taken as 7,000/- per month. The age of the claimant is 45 years and applicable multiplier is '14'. These facts are not in dispute. The Tribunal in paragraph No.50, after detailed discussion at length held that the permanent disability to the whole body as 28%. I do not find any reason to interfere with the said findings. 22. It is true that the compensation awarded under other heads are on lower side. Hence, entitled to enhancement. Accordingly, the following amount of compensation is recalculated: - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 Compensation under different Heads As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) As awarded by this Court (Rs.) Injury pain and sufferings 60,000 75,000 Loss of earning during treatment. (Rs.7,000x3) 18,000 21,000 Medical expenses 59,055 59,055 Loss of future income(Rs.7,000x12x14x28%) 2,82,240 3,29,280 Loss of amenities 35,000 50,000 Conveyance, nourishment, food and attendant charges 26,000 35,000 Future medical expenses 25,000 25,000 Total Rs.5,05,295/- Rs.5,94,335/- After deducting 20% contributory negligence Rs.4,04,236/- Rs.4,75,468/- Enhanced amount Rs.71,232/- Rounded off Rs.72,000/- 23. The claimant Channabasappa in MVC.No.5950/2012 was the rider of the motor cycle. He had contributed 20% towards the negligence that caused the accident in question. Therefore, he is entitled for 80% of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and I pass the following: - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 ORDER i. MFA.Nos.6436/2014, 6437/2014 and 6438/2014 are allowed in part. ii. The impugned judgment and award dated 01.08.2014 passed by the II Additional Small Causes Judge and XXVIII ACMM, Bengaluru in MVC.Nos.5948/2012, 5949/2012 and 5950/2012 are modified. iii. The claimant in MVC.No.5948/2012 is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.81,000/-. iv. The claimant in MVC.No.5949/2012 is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.49,000/-. v. The claimant in MVC.No.5950/2012 is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.72,000/-. - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:26560 MFA No. 6437 of 2014 C/W MFA No. 6436 of 2014 MFA No. 6438 of 2014 vi. The enhanced amount of compensation in all the appeals carries interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. The claimants are not entitled to the interest on the amount awarded towards future medical expenses. vii. The amount of compensation awarded is marginal, the accident took place during the year 2012, therefore, entire enhanced amount of compensation shall be released in favour of the claimants on due identification. Send back the trial Court records along with the copy of this judgments. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE AG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40