- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15972 MFA No. 100368 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100368 OF 2015 (MV) BETWEEN: THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NORTH WEST KARNATAKA ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, BELGAUM DIVISION, BELAGAVI-590016. REPRESENTED BY, CHIEF LAW OFFICER, NWKRTC, GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI-580030, DIST: DHARWAD. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. M.K. SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE) AND: PRAKASH S/O. BASAPPA GANAGI, AGED 41 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE & AGRICULTURE COOLIE, NOW: NIL, R/O. HIREBAGEWADI-591109, TALUKA & DIST: BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENT (NOTICE TO RESPONDENT IS SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO SET-ASIDE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13-11-2014 IN M.V.C. NO.1682/2012 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE & MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-II, BELAGAVI AT: BELAGAVI AND DISMISS THE CLAIM PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15972 MFA No. 100368 of 2015 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) 1. Heard Sri. M. K. Soudagar, learned counsel for the appellant. Though notice was served upon the respondent, he has not chosen to contest the matter. 2. The appellant against whom liability was fastened to pay compensation to the respondent herein by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Belgaum through orders in MVC No.1682 of 2012 dated 13.11.2014 is before this Court with a contention that the amount granted as compensation is exorbitant. 3. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant states that the respondent sustained only one grievous injury in a road traffic accident. When the assessment of PW2 is that the disability in respect of upper limb is only 25%, the Tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 15%. Learned counsel states that, though no evidence was produced - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15972 MFA No. 100368 of 2015 regarding the occupation and earnings of the respondent as on the date of accident, the Tribunal took the notional income as Rs.6,000/- per month. Learned counsel submits that, for the relevant period for settlement of claims the courts are taking the notional income as Rs.5,000/- only. Learned counsel also contends that the Tribunal has deducted 1/3rd of the earnings towards personal and living expenses and added 30% towards future prospects which ought not to have been done. 4. A perusal of record reveals justification in the submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellant. 5. On going through the entire material that is brought on record and on subjecting the impugned order to scrutiny, this Court is of the view that the Tribunal, by taking the notional income as Rs.5,000/- per month and the disability in respect of whole body as 10%, - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15972 MFA No. 100368 of 2015 without any deduction towards personal and living expenses, ought to have granted compensation which the appellant is entitled to towards ‘loss of future earnings’. 6. Considering the totality of evidence produced, this Court ultimately holds that the amount that is granted in excess is Rs.30,000/-. Hence, the appeal is disposed of with the following order: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. Compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Belagavi through orders in MVC No.1682 of 2012 dated 13.11.2014 is reduced by Rs.30,000/-. iii. Amount, if any, in deposit be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE gab CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34