- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12397 MFA No. 104639 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 104639 OF 2018 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SHRI. KUMARA SWAMY S/O. LATE VEERBHADRAIAH, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: EX-AUTO DRIVER, R/O. CHIKKERAHALLI VILLAGE, MOLAKALMUR TALUK, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT GUGGARAHATTI, BALLARI-583101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GURUKUMAR V.A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI. M. YERRISWAMY S/O. P.A.MALLANNA, AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER, R/O. BASAVESHWARA NAGAR, RAMPURA VILLAGE, MOLAKALMUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577540. 2. SHRI. K.RAMACHANDRAPPA S/O. LAKSHMAPPA AGE: 72 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. NEAR ESHWARA TEMPLE, RAMPURA VILLAGE, MOLAKALMUR TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577540. 3. M/S. IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BY ITS MANAGER, RAGHAVA KRISHNA COMPLEX, OPP. ANDHRA BANK, K.C. ROAD, BALLARI-583101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.Y. KALAGI, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 DISPENSED WITH) MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12397 MFA No. 104639 of 2018 THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC. 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE LOWER COURT RECORDS IN MVC NO.385/2016 DATED 10.11.2017 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF “BEFORE THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.V AT BALLARI AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD FROM RS.1,18,040/- TO RS. 8,50,000/- ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF “BEFORE THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.V AT BALLARI”. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘M.V.Act,’ for short) by the petitioner being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal vide judgment dated 10.11.2017 passed in MVC No.385/2016 by the learned MACT-V, Ballari. 2. The brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: On 22.08.2015, the petitioner along with his son-in- law by name Prabhu were proceeding on a Hero Honda Splendor Plus Motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-16/W- - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12397 MFA No. 104639 of 2018 8080 from Chikkerhalli village towards Rajapura Bannihati village, when they reached near the accident spot, at that time, the driver of the Tractor/Trailer bearing Reg. No. KA- 16/1567 and 1568 came from behind, drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motorcycle. As a result, the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries all over the body. Hence, he filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the MV Act. 3. Despite service of notice, the owner and the driver of the offending vehicle, remained unrepresented and they were placed ex parte. 4. The insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the driver of the offending vehicle was not possessing a valid and effective driving license as of the date of accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12397 MFA No. 104639 of 2018 5. The tribunal based on the pleadings of the parties framed the relevant issues. 6. The petitioner to substantiate his case examined himself as PW.1, examined the doctor as PW.2 and marked 15 documents as Exs.P1 to P15. In rebuttal, the Insurance Company has not entered the witness box, and not produced any documents. 7. The tribunal after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part and awarded a compensation of ₹ 1,18,040/- with interest @ 9% per annum and directed the insurance company to deposit the compensation amount. 8. The petitioner dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation filed this Miscellaneous First Appeal. 9. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the insurance company. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12397 MFA No. 104639 of 2018 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner to prove the disability examined the doctor as PW.2, who has opined that the petitioner has suffered a permanent disability to the extent of 20%, wherein the tribunal has assessed the disability at 7%, which is on the lower side. He also submits that the compensation awarded under the other heads is on the lower side. Hence on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal. 11. Per contra, learned counsel for the insurance company supported the impugned judgment passed by the Tribunal and prays to dismiss the appeal. 12. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel to the parties. 13. The point that would arises for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation. 14. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of accident and the injuries sustained by the petitioner. The - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12397 MFA No. 104639 of 2018 petitioner has produced the charge sheet marked as Ex.P5, which discloses that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. 15. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the petitioner contended that he is the auto- rickshaw driver and earning ₹10,000/- per month. To substantiate his contention, the petitioner has not produced any proof of income. In the absence of income proof, this court has taken the notional income as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority i.e., ₹8,000/- as the accident is of the year 2015 and the petitioner was 32 years old as of the date of accident. The petitioner examined the doctor as PW.2, who has deposed that the petitioner has suffered a permanent disability to the extent of 20%, wherein the tribunal has assessed the disability at 7%. The PW.2 is not a treated doctor and the tribunal was justified in assessing the disability at 7% which is just and proper. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12397 MFA No. 104639 of 2018 16. Thus, considering the evidence of PW.2, this court reassesses the compensation under the following heads: Compensation awarded in Rs. Sl. No. Heads of compensation By the Tribunal By this Court 1 Pain and suffering 10,000/- 25,000/- 2 Medical expenses, Diet Nourishment and Attendant charges 5,400/- 5,400/- 3 Loss of income during laid up period (8,000 x 2) 12,000/- 16,000/- 4 Loss of future income on account of permanent physical disability (8,000X 12X16X7%) 80,640/- Rs.1,07,520/- 5 Loss of amenities and enjoyment of life 10,000/- 25,000/- Total : 1,18,040/- 1,78,920/- Compensation enhanced by: 60,880/- 17. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of ₹1,78,920/- as against the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at ₹1,18,040/-. Thus, the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:12397 MFA No. 104639 of 2018 petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of ₹60,880/-. 18. Accordingly I proceed to pass the following: ORDER I. The Miscellaneous First Appeal is allowed. II. The judgment and award passed by the tribunal is modified. III. The petitioner is entitle to an enhanced compensation of ₹60,880/- with interest @ 8 % per annum from the date of petition till its realisation. IV. The insurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest within 8 weeks. V. The office is directed to transfer and transmit the trial court records and the deposits, if any. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE SKS CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29