- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11320 MFA No. 104205 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104205 OF 2017 BETWEEN: MINOR MANIKANTA S/O K. VEERESH AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, SINCE MINIOR REP/BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN AND FATHER SRI. K.VEERESH S/O GOURANNA, AGED: 41 YEARS, DRIVER, R/O: BATRI ROAD, SREENAGAR COLONY, W.NO.31, BALLARI-583101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MANJUNATHA G PATIL, ADV) AND: 1. SRI. VEERESH S/O. MOKA MALLAIAH, AGED: 29 YEARS, RIDER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE BEARING REG.NO.KA-34/EC-9528, R/O: BATRI AREA, BALLARI-583101. 2. SRI.MADHIRE DODDA BASAPPA S/O. ERANNA, AGED: 32 YEARS, OWNER OF THE MOTOR CYCLE BEARING REG.NO.KA-34/EC-9528, R/O: NO.22E, SUNKALAMMA GADDE, MUSTAGATTA VILLAGE, TQ & DIST. BALLARI -583101. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER M/S. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BALLARI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADV FOR R3 NOTICE TO R1 & R2 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.11.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.474/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-V, BALLARI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.15 17:48:29 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11320 MFA No. 104205 of 2017 PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) 1. This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed by the claimant, challenging the judgment and award dated 28.11.2016 passed in MVC No.474/2015 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V, Ballari (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’, for short), seeking an enhancement of compensation. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: 3. The claim petition is filed by a minor through natural guardian. It is the case of the petitioner that, on 30.10.2014, at about 4:30 PM, the minor claimant and his brother were proceeding by walk to their house, after completion of school, on proper side of the road. At that time, the rider of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-34/EC- - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11320 MFA No. 104205 of 2017 9528 came from the opposite direction riding the same in a high speed and rash and negligent manner and dashed to the minor claimant. As a result, the minor claimant sustained a grievous injuries. He sustained a huge medical expenses. The natural father/guardian of the minor claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by the minor claimant. Accordingly prays to allow the claim petition. 4. A notice was issued to the rider and the owner of the motorcycle. Despite the service of a notice, they remained unrepresented, and were placed exparte. 5. The insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the rider of the motorcycle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident and there is a breach of policy conditions. Hence, the insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11320 MFA No. 104205 of 2017 6. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 7. The claimant, to prove his case, father of the claimant was examined as PW.1 and also examined the Doctor as PW.2, and marked 13 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-13. Conversely, the insurance company has neither examined any witness nor produced any documents; however, filed a memo producing the insurance policy. 8. The Tribunal, after assessing verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgment dated 28.11.2016 and awarded a compensation of Rs.1,60,000/- with costs and future interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of the petition till its realization and held that the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation, and the insurance company was directed to deposit the compensation amount. 9. The claimant ,being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, filed this Miscellaneous First Appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11320 MFA No. 104205 of 2017 10. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the claimant, and the learned counsel for the insurance company ,appearing through virtual mode. 11. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that the claimant, to prove the disability examined the Doctor as PW.2, who opined that the claimant has suffered a permanent disability to an extent of 30% to the whole body whereas, the Tribunal has taken the disability at 10% which is on the lower side. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal and enhance the compensation. 12. Per contra, the learned counsel for the insurance company supported the impugned judgment and award and submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and do not call for any interference by this court. Hence, prays to dismiss the appeal. 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. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11320 MFA No. 104205 of 2017 15. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident, the injuries suffered by the minor claimant and the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle. The claimant has produced a chargesheet marked as Ex. P4, which is filed against the rider of the motor cycle. The Tribunal was justified in recording a finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle. 16. Regarding quantum is concerned: The claimant was aged 6 years old at the time of the accident and the claimant examined the Doctor as PW.2, who deposed that the claimant is examined clinically and radiology by him. He has issued the disability certificate and opined that the claimant has suffered a permanent disability to an extent of 30% to the whole body, however, the Tribunal has taken the disability at 10%. Considering the evidence of PW.2 and the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant, this Court reassesses the disability at 20%. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11320 MFA No. 104205 of 2017 Company Limited and another reported in (2014) 14 SCC 396 held as follows: “ 12. Though it is difficult to have an accurate assessment of the compensation in the case of children suffering disability on account of a motor vehicle accident, having regard to the relevant factors, precedents and the approach of various High Courts, we are of the view that the appropriate compensation on all other heads in addition to the actual expenditure for treatment, attendant etc, should be, if the disability is above 10% and up to 30% to the whole body, Rs.3 lakhs; up to 60%, Rs.4 lakhs; up to 90%, Rs.5 lakhs and above 90%, it should be Rs.6 lakhs. For permanent disability up to 10%, it should be Rs.1 lakh, unless there are exceptional circumstances to take a different yardstick.” 17. In the present case, this Court re-assess the permanent disability at 20%. The claimant was hospitalized for a few days and the same has caused the loss of earning to the parents. Thus, considering the evidence of PW.2 and the nature of the injuries sustained by the minor claimant, this Court re-assess the compensation in the following manner: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11320 MFA No. 104205 of 2017 Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs. Compensation re-assessed by this Court Rs. 1 Pain and suffering 10,000/- 25,000/- 2 Medical expenses, attendant charges, conveyance, nourishment, food and other incidental charges 5,300/- 5,300/- 3 Loss of future income on account of permanent disability 1,00,000/- 2,00,000/- 4 Loss of amenities, life comforts and expectation of life 20,000/- 20,000/- 5 Loss of income of the parents during the period of hospitalization 24,000/- 40,000/- TOTAL 1,59,300/- 2,90,300/- 18. Thus, the claimant in all, is entitled to a total re- assessed compensation of Rs.2,90,300/- as against Rs.1,59,300/- awarded by the tribunal. That is, to an enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,31,000/-. In view of the same, the point regarding quantum is answered accordingly. 19. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER i. The appeal is Allowed. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11320 MFA No. 104205 of 2017 ii. The judgment and award dated 28.11.2016 passed in MVC No.474/2015 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V, Ballari, is modified. iii. The claimant is entitled to the re-assessed compensation of Rs.2,90,300/- as against Rs.1,59,300/-, awarded by the Tribunal. The claimant is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.1,31,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till its realization. iv. The insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest 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 LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 27