- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13985 MFA No. 102247 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102247 OF 2016 (MV-) BETWEEN: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI, REP: CHIEF REGIONAL MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, T.P. HUB, SRINATH COMPLEX, II FLOOR, NEW COTTON MARKET, HUBLI-580022. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. M.K. SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI PRASHANT S/O. VEERAPPA REVADI, AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, R/O: PLOT NO.2, INDAL ROAD, AZAM NAGAR, BELAGAVI. 2. BASAVARAJ VEERAPPA KADROLI, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE SERVICE, GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13985 MFA No. 102247 of 2016 R/O: RUDRAKSHIMATH GALLI, BAILHONGAL. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DEEPAK S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN M.V.C. NO.2540/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.03.2016 BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COST AND GRANT SUCH OTHER AND/OR FURTHER RELIEFS, AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13985 MFA No. 102247 of 2016 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Sri.M.K.Soudagar learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri.Deepak S.Kulkarni learned counsel for respondent No.1. 2. This appeal is the outcome of the order that is rendered by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for brevity) in M.V.C. No.2540/2013 dated 04.03.2016. The appellant against whom liability is fixed to pay compensation is before this Court by filing the present appeal. 3. Arguing the matter only on the quantum of amount that is awarded as compensation and the interest part, learned counsel for the appellant states that respondent No.1 sustained only one grievous injury and two - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13985 MFA No. 102247 of 2016 simple injuries during the course of accident. An injury to the toe though grievous in nature, does not result in any permanent physical disability. But without considering the said aspect, the Tribunal awarded huge sum of Rs.1,14,000/- as compensation that too with interest at the rate of 9% per annum and aggrieved by the liability imposed thus, the present appeal is filed. Learned counsel thereby seeks to reduce the sum that is awarded as compensation and the interest fixed. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.1 states that respondent No.1 underwent a surgery during the course of treatment and the evidence of PW-3 is that the disability in respect of right foot is 15% and therefore respondent No.1 should have filed an appeal seeking enhancement in compensation. Learned counsel by submitting thus states that there are no grounds to reduce the amount that is granted as compensation. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13985 MFA No. 102247 of 2016 5. The Tribunal through the impugned order held that respondent No.1 is entitled to a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.30,000/- towards loss of future happiness and amenities, Rs.20,000/- towards loss of income during the period of treatment, Rs.14,000/- towards incidental charges and Rs.30,000/- towards medical expenses. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained, the treatment taken including the surgical procedure undergone, this Court is of the view that the sum that is granted as compensation cannot be termed to be exorbitant. However, this Court is of the view that the appellant is justified in seeking to reduce the rate of interest on the awarded sum. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13985 MFA No. 102247 of 2016 (ii) The rate of interest fixed by the Tribunal is reduced from 9% per annum to 6% per annum. (iii) Amount if any in deposit be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE RH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23