- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100024 OF 2021 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100025 OF 2021 (MV-I) MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100974 OF 2022 (MV-I) IN MFA NO. 100024 OF 2021: BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, BELAGAVI (OWNER OF NWKRTC BEARING NO. KA-23/F-854) REPRESENTED BY CHIEF LAW OFFICER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S. C. BHUTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. ROOPA W/O. BASAVARAJ CHOUGALA, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, NOW NIL, R/O. HEBBAL, HUKKERI TALUK-591309 NOW AT SADASHIVA NAGAR, BELAGAVI 2. SHRI. GAJANAN LAXMAN BAGADI, MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O. HEBBAL, HUKKERI TALUK-591309 DIST.BELAGAVI Digitally signed by SHAKAMBARI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 (OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KA-22/EJ-9518) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRASHANT MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.02.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.2295/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.17,35,968/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALISATION. IN M.F.A NO. 100025 OF 2021: BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, BELAGAVI (OWNER OF NWKRTC BEARING NO. KA-23/F-854) REPRESENTED BY CHIEF LAW OFFICER …APPELLANT (BY SRI. S. C. BHUTI, ADVOCATE) AND: SHRI. LAXMAN S/O. GANAPATHI BAGADI, AGE:52 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE AND DRIVER OF TRACTOR, NOW NIL, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 R/O: HEBBAL, HUKKERI TALUK-591309, NOW AT DESAI GALLI, KAKATI, BELGAVI TALUK. …RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.02.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.2294/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,14,667/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION. IN M.F.A NO. 100974 OF 2022: BETWEEN: SMT. ROOPA W/O. BASAVARAJ CHOUGALA, AGE:31 YEARS, OCC.COOLIE, NOW NIL, R/O.HEBBAL, HUKKERI TALUK-591309 NOW AT SADASHIVA NAGAR, BELAGAVI …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRASHANT MATHAPATI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, BELAGAVI-590009. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 (OWNER OF NWKRTC BEARING NO. KA-23/F-854) 2. SHRI. GAJANAN LAXMAN BAGADI, MAJOR, OCC.BUSINESS, R/O.HEBBAL, HUKKERI TALUK-591309 DIST.BELAGAVI (OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KA-22/EJ-9518) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S. C. BHUTI, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.02.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.2295/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND MEMBER OF ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) These three appeals are directed against the common judgment and award dated 25.2.2020 passed in MVC No.2295 and 2294/2018 by the X Addl. District Judge and Additional MACT, Belagavi. 2. MFA Nos.100024/2021 and MFA No.100025/2021 are filed by the Divisional Controller, NWKRTC, Belagavi challenging the quantum of compensation and liability, whereas, MFA No.100974/2022 is filed by the claimant in MVC No.2295/2018 seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. Parties to these appeals are referred to as per their rank before the Tribunal. 4. That the claimants in the aforesaid two claim petitions filed respective claim petitions seeking compensation on account of personal injuries suffered by them in a road traffic accident that took place on 18.9.2018 in between 1.15 p.m. and 1.30 p.m. when both of them i.e., - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 claimant Lakshman Ganapathi Bagadi was the rider of the motor cycle bearing Regn.No.KA-23/EJ-9518 and claimant in MVC No.2295/2018 was a pillion rider and when they came near Gownal cross on Hebbal-Kochari Road, at that time, the driver of NWKRTC Bus bearing Regn.No.KA-23/F- 854 came from Chikodi side in a rash and negligent manner in high speed, lost control over the bus and dashed to the motor cycle. Thereby the claimants in both petitions fell down and sustained grievous injuries on their person. Initially they were shifted to General Hospital, Sankeshwar for treatment and thereafter, the claimant Roopa was shifted to Hattaraki Hospital and trauma centre, Gadahinglaj. She has spent substantial amount towards medical expenses and was in hospital for 25 days as in-patient from the date of accident. According to her, prior to the accident, she was doing coolie and was earning Rs.12,000/- per month. Because of these accidental injuries, she has suffered permanent physical disability and lost her earnings capacity. Thus, claimants prayed to award the compensation as prayed. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 5. As no appeal is preferred by Lakshman, it is not necessary to narrate the facts pleaded by him in his petition. Before the Tribunal, respondents appeared and respondent no.1 filed detailed objection to both the petitions denying the age, avocation, income, injuries, accident and nature of treatment taken by both the claimants so also the medical expenses incurred by them. 6. It is contended that the owner and insurer of the said motor bike are not impleaded, therefore, the petitions are bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. It is contended that the rider of motor bike was not holding the valid and effective driving licence as on the date of accident and hence, respondent is not liable to pay the compensation. 7. It is contended that, because of the contributory negligence on the part of injured Lakshmana, the said accident has taken place and it is because of his rashness and negligence, the said accident has taken place. 8. After impleading respondent no.2, similar contentions were taken up by him and it is contended that, - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 rider of motor bike was not rash and negligent in riding the motor bike. There was no contributory negligence as contended by respondent no.1 and he was holding valid driving licence. It is prayed by both the respondents to dismiss the claim petitions. 9. Based upon the rival pleadings of both the parties in both the petitions, relevant issues were framed by the Tribunal. 10. Before the Tribunal, the present appellant- Rooopa to prove her claim entered the witness box as PW.1, so also Lakshmana as PW.2 and also examined PW.3 Dr.S.R.Angadi and got marked Ex.P1 to P22 and closed claimant’s evidence. 11. The driver of the said offending bus by name Dastagir Gulab Naikwadi entered the witness box as RW.1 to speak about the said accident which has taken place because of sudden entering of Lakshman with the pillion rider in the cross road. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 12. After conclusion of the evidence, the learned Tribunal having heard the arguments and on perusal of the materials placed on record, has categorically held that, the said accident has taken place because of rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver and both the claimants are entitled for compensation and ultimately held that, the claimant in MVC No.2295/2018 (Mrs.Roopa) is entitled for the compensation as tabulated below: Sl. No. Particulars Amount In Rs. 1. Loss of future earnings 12,24,000/- 2. Pain and Sufferings 75,000/- 3. Food, transport and attendant charges including loss of income 50,000/- 4. Loss of amenities in life 40,000/- 5. Medical Expenses 1,96,968/- 6. Future Medical Expenses 1,50,000/- TOTAL 17,35,968/- 13. The aforesaid first two appeals are preferred by NWKRTC challenging the quantum as well as the liability fastened on it, whereas, claimant Roopa has sought enhancement in compensation. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 14. As stated supra, being dissatisfied by the award passed in MVC No.2295/2018, petitioner therein has not preferred any appeal, perhaps admitting the award passed by the Tribunal. 15. Now we are concerned with the quantum of compensation awarded in the claim petition as well as liability. 16. The learned Panel Counsel for the appellant Sri S.C.Bhuti submits that, it is a cross road where the accident has taken place and when the rider of the motor bike Lakshman along with pillion rider Roopa were approaching the main road, it was his duty to stop and proceed. But, because of sudden entering the cross road by rider Lakshman along with pillion rider on his motor bike without following the traffic rules and regulations, the said vehicle dashed to the NWRTC which was moving on the main road, thereby, he is also responsible for causing the accident. He would further submit that, even the award passed by the Tribunal in both the claim petitions is on the - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 higher side and the Tribunal ought not to have granted that much of amount towards compensation. Hence, he prays to allow both the appeals and also prays to dismiss the appeal filed by the claimant Smt.Roopa. 17. As against this submission, learned counsel for respondent Sri Prashanth Mathapathi appearing for the claimant-Smt.Roopa, as well as other respondents refuting the submissions of NWKRTC's counsel, justifies the reasons and findings of the Tribunal with regard to the accident. He would submit that, when the accident took place, Smt.Roopa was aged 28 years and there was amputation of her leg below the knee. She is using artificial limb. So also he submits that, she has suffered permanent disability. She is having three children and is suffering physically, mentally and financially. Therefore, he prays to enhance the compensation. 18. We have given our anxious consideration to the arguments of both the side, and perused the records. - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 19. In view of rival submissions of both the side, the point that would arise for our consideration is: “Whether the findings of the Tribunal with regard to rash and negligent driving of NWKRTC bus require any interference so also quantum of award passed in both the claim petitions?” 20. Sofar as accident that took place on 18.9.2018 in between 1.15 pm and 1.30 p.m. near Gownal Cross on Hebbal-Kochi road in between a motor bike driven by Lakshman Bagadi along with pillion rider Roopa with NWKRTC bus is not in dispute. 21. PW.1 and 2 being pillion rider and rider of motor bike are specific in their respective evidence that, when rider of the motor bike was approaching the main road, he stopped near the place of accident and at that time, the bus came and hit against the motor bike. Even in the cross- examination, PW.1 is consistent about the said fact. This PW.2 Lakshman speaks that, he came on his motor bike along with the pillion rider from Gownal to Gownal cross and - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 was standing at the Gownal cross. There is no denial of this fact by the respondent in his cross-examination. 22. RW.1 Dastagir Naikwadi, the driver of the offending bus at that time has stated that, the bus driven by him was proceeding from Kolhapur to Belagavi. He further states that, there was road work on Belagavi-Sankeshwar Road. Therefore, his bus was proceeding through Kamathanur cross. There is no evidence placed on record by the NWKRTC that, he was permitted to drive the bus in a changed route except his say. Though he states that, when he came near the spot of the accident, the rider of the motor cycle came from Gownal towards Chikodi-Belagavi road in high speed and in a rash and negligent manner without giving attention to the traffic, dashed to the front side portion of the bus and fell down, but in the cross- examination, he states that, his bus has to ply on NH-4 from Kolhapur to Belagavi, He has to pass through Sankeshwar, Kamathur, Gownal and again reach NH road. He admits that, the place of accident is junction of four roads. If that is so, he must have been more cautious, when he was crossing - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 four approaching roads as the said roads are coming from village side. He admits that, he is facing a criminal trial before the JMFC court Sankeshwar. 23. Ex.P3(a) is the sketch showing 15 ft. width road and there is a cross-road. That means the driver of the offending bus was having sufficient space towards right side towards Belagavi. It is the say of PW.1 and 2 that, when the accident took place, PW.2 had stopped his motor cycle and at that time, the said accident has taken place. The learned Tribunal evaluated the evidence believing the version of the claimants categorically held that, the said accident has taken place because of rash and negligent driving of offending bus by its driver. It is true that, whenever any vehicle is approaching the main road, riding of the vehicles has to stop, see on either side of the road and then proceed. It is the say of PW.1 and PW.2 that PW.2 had stopped his motor bike, when he was approaching the main road. Considering all these aspects, the Tribunal has rightly concluded that, the said accident has taken place because of rash and negligent driving of bus. We do not find any factual - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 error committed by the tribunal in arriving at such a conclusion. Therefore, no interference is called for into such finding. 24. Sofar as injuries suffered by claimant Roopa in the said accident, she relies upon Ex.P6 the wound certificate wherein the Doctor at the Primary Health Centre, Sankeshwar noticed the following injuries on her person and has given opinion as under: "Cut open wound on both lower legs. Pt.was referred to Orthopaedician BIMS. MLC No.2068 from Hattarki Hospital shows (1) rt.sided tabula fibula # (2) lt. sided degloving injury to thigh. (3) rt.sided aerovasular injury to leg (4) absent pulse c crush injury to rt.leg. (5) Claw on lt.ankle 4 x 5 mm". 25. Thereafter, she was shifted to Hattaraki Hospital and Trauma Centre, Kolhapur and there the doctors opined that, four injuries are grievous in nature and one was simple in nature. - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 26. She underwent surgeries and there was amputation of her right leg below the knee. She has spent substantial money towards medical and other incidental expenses. She has produced the Hospital bills dated 3.11.2018 having paid Rs.1,08,000/-. In addition to the said medical bills, she has spent certain money towards other medical investigations, purchase of medicines etc. She also has produced prescriptions with bills. The Tribunal has rightly appreciated the said medical records and has arrived at proper medical expenses. 27. She has examined PW.3 Dr. Angadi to speak about the disability. According to his evidence, she has suffered fracture of right side tibia and fibula and there was an amputation of her right leg below knee. The doctor has assessed the disability to the extent of 65% due to below knee amputation upper 1/3rd of the right leg as per ALIMCO Manual and Govt. of India Notification. Evidently, he is not a treated doctor. He has just assessed the disability based upon the medical records. This PW.3 have been cross- examined by the respondent no.2. Even respondent no.2 - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 admits that injured-Roopa had suffered amputation of right leg below knee level. 28. Taking into consideration of the medical records and the treatment taken by the claimant, by this time, because of her young age, the injuries must have been healed. Therefore, in view of the evidence brought on record, it is assessed that claimant has suffered permanent disabilities at 60% to the whole body because of accidental injuries. She has to take care of her children as well as maintain her family. This physical disability may come in the way of her earning capacity, as well as her day today activities. Though she claims that she was earning Rs.12,000/- per month but, except her self-serving testimony, no evidence is placed on record. The learned Tribunal has assessed her income at Rs.10,000/- per month and even Tribunal has rightly assessed the permanent disability at 60% to the whole body. The said accident has taken place in the year 2018, therefore, as per the guidelines issued by the KSLSA, in the absence of relevant evidence with regard to the income of Rs.11,750/- is to be assessed - 18 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 as her income per month. Thereby, the assessment of the notional income of the injured at Rs.10,000/- by the Tribunal is on lower side. As she has suffered the disability to the extent of 60%, 60% of Rs.11,750/- comes to Rs.7,050/-. It is to be multiplied with 12 to calculate annually, it will be Rs.84,600/-. In view of her age as spoken to by her 28 years, in view of judgment in Sarla Verma and Ors. V/s. Delhi Transport Corp. and Anr.1, the proper multiplier that would be applicable is `17’. Thus, the 'loss of future income due to disability' comes Rs.14,38,200/-. 29. Sofar as other heads such as 'pain and suffering' the Tribunal has rightly assessed at Rs.75,000/-. Sofar as 'food, transportation and attendant charges', the Tribunal has rightly assessed the compensation at Rs.50,000/- which, in our opinion is just and reasonable. It does not call for any interference. 30. She being a lady aged 28 years at the time accident cannot enjoy the life as she was enjoying prior to 1 AIR 2009 SC 3104 - 19 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 the accident and hence, there is 'loss of amenities' to be enjoyed in life. Though the Tribunal has awarded Rs.40,000/- towards the same but, it requires enhancement. In our considered opinion, she is entitled for Rs.50,000/- towards 'loss of amenities' to be enjoyed in life. 31. Based upon medical records, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,96,968/- towards 'medical expenses'. As it is based upon the bills, the award of compensation by the Tribunal is just and proper and do not require any interference. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,50,000/- towards 'future medical expenses' but, not awarded compensation towards purchase of artificial limb which requires money to purchase the same. Therefore, including Rs.1,50,000/- in all, globally Rs.5 lakhs is awarded towards purchase of artificial limb. The claimant is not entitled for interest on future medical expenses and for purchase of artificial limb as she has to purchase the same whenever required. - 20 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 32. Thus, the claimant is held entitled for compensation as under: Sl.No. Heads Amount Rs. 1. Loss of future income due to disability 14,38,200/- 2. Medical Expenses 1,96,968/- 3. Loss of amenities in life 50,000/- 4. Food Nourishment and Attendant Charges 50,000/- 5. Pain and Suffering 75,000/- 6. Future medical expenses & for artificial limb 5,00,000/- Total 23,10,168/- Rounded off to Rs.23,10,000/- 33. Sofar as claimant in MVC No.2294/2018 is concerned, the learned Tribunal has awarded in all Rs.1,14,667/- under all the relevant heads. The said claimant has not preferred any appeal being dissatisfied with the said award. In our considered opinion, taking into consideration of the injuries suffered by the claimant- Lakshman which are grievous in nature and considering the evidence of the doctor, the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that, this claimant Lakshman is entitled for compensation towards 'loss of future earnings', 'pain and - 21 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 suffering', 'food transport and attendant charges', 'loss of income during treatment period' and 'loss of amenities' to be enjoyed in life and medical expenses. The assessment of compensation under the aforesaid heads is just and reasonable. No evidence is placed on record by the appellants so as to interfere into such findings. Therefore, there is no merit in the appeal filed by the NWKRTC to interfere with the quantum of compensation so awarded to claimant - Lakshman. 34. Sofar as liability is concerned, it is held that, the said accident has taken place because of rash and negligent driving of bus owned by respondent no.1 driven by RW.1 being its servant. For the tortiuous act of the servant, respondent no.1-owner (master) is held liable to pay the compensation. Accordingly, the appeals filed by the appellant-NWKRT are liable to be dismissed and appeal filed by the claimant Smt.Roopa deserves to be allowed in-part. 35. In sofar as award of interest is concerned, the Tribunal has awarded interest on the compensation amount - 22 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 at 9% p.a. which is on the higher side. Thus, the same is reduced to 6% p.a. Thus, the claimant is entitled to interest on the compensation amount at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. Resultantly, we pass the following: ORDER i) The appeals in MFA No.100024/2021 & MFA No.100025/2021 filed by appellant-NWKRTC are hereby dismissed. ii) Appeal No.100974/2022 filed by the claimant is allowed in-part. The claimant is held entitled for compensation of Rs.23,10,000/- as against Rs.17,35,968/- awarded by the Tribunal and there is enhancement of Rs.5,74,032/-. iii) The judgment and award passed by the X Addl.District and Addl.MACT, Belagavi in MVC No.2295/2018 is modified accordingly. - 23 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:3612-DB MFA No. 100024 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100025 of 2021 MFA No. 100974 of 2022 iv) The claimant in MVC No.2295/2018 is entitled for interest on the entire compensation amount @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization thereby reducing the interest awarded by the Tribunal at 9% p.a. The compensation of Rs.5 lakhs awarded towards future medical expenses and purchase of artificial limb does not carry the interest. v) Respondent-NWKRTC is held liable to pay the compensation. vi) There shall be modified awarded accordingly. vii) Registry is directed to send back the Tribunal records along with a copy of this judgment forthwith. Sd/- (B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE Sk/- /CT:VG LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 33