- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102753 OF 2022 (MV-I) BETWEEN: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER K.S.R.T.C. BUS BEARING REG. NO.KA-31/F- 1263, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SIRSI-581401, TQ. SIRSI, DIST. UTTAR KANNADA THROUGH CHIEF LAW OFFICER, N.W.K.R.T.C., HUBBALLI CENTRAL OFFICE, GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI-580030. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MADANMOHAN M KHANNUR, ADV) AND: 1. SHRI VINAYAK S/O PARAMESHWAR NAIK AGE. 30 YEARS, OCC. SERVICE TECHNICIAN IN iTRIANGLE INFOTECH PVT. LTD., BENGALURU, R/O. SUBHAS ROAD, KUMTA, TQ. KUMTA-581343, DIST. UTTAR KANNADA. 2. MOVIN DUMING LOPIES REG. OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KA-47/Q-7575, POST. GUNDA, BUNDAR ROAD, KUMTA, TQ. KUMTA-581343, DIST. UTTAR KANNADA. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 3. BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, KUMTA-581343 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRIYUTHS. V.G. BHAT & SURAJ M. KATAGI, ADVS FOR R1, NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED & UNREPRESENTED, SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, SRI. SHASHANK HEGDE AND AASMA N.M, ADVS FOR R3) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.02.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.451/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KUMTA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.6,24,208/- WITH INTEREST AT 9 PERCENT P.A. ON RS.5,99,208/- FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) 1. This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed by the KSRTC, aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 15/02/2022 passed by the Addl. MACT, Kumta, (hereinafter the ‘Tribunal’) in MVC No. 451/2019. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: The claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation of ₹15,00,000/- on the ground that on 19/01/2019, when he was proceeding from Kumta to Ankola in a motor cycle belonged to Respondent No.2, bearing Reg. No.KA-47/Q 7575, the driver of the KSRTC Bus bearing Reg. No. KA-31/F 1263 came from a opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner, collided with the said motor cycle, and caused an accident. Due to the said accident the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalised and spent huge amount towards the medical expenses. Hence, pray to allow the claim petition. 3. After the service of notice, the respondents appeared through their respective counsels. Thought, Respondent No.2-the owner of the mother cycle bearing - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 Reg. No. KA-47/Q 7575, appeared through his counsel, did not file a statement of objections. 4. Respondent No.1 - KSRTC filed a statement of objections denying the claim potion averments. It is contended that the accident occurred due to the rash, negligent and careless riding of the motor cycle by the claimant himself. It is contended that the claimant, while trying to overtake a lorry moving in front of him, collided with the bus in question, coming from the opposite side. Further, it is contended that the claimant did not possess the valid and effective driving license and the valid fitness certificate as of the date of accident. Hence, on these grounds, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the KSRTC. 5. Respondent No.3-the insurance company filed a statement of objections denying the claim petition averments. It stated its contention in the same manner as of Respondent No.1. It is admitted that the motorcycle in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 question was insured with it and the policy was valid as of the date of accident. However, there is a breach of terms and conditions of the policy. It is contended that the accident occurred due to the contributory negligence on the part of the claimant and the concerned police, after the thorough investigation, filed a charge sheet against the claimant for the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle in question. Hence, on these grounds, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company. 6. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. 7. The claimant, to prove the claim petition averments, examined himself as PW-1, examined two witnesses as PW-2 and PW-3 and marked 61 documents as Exs.P1 to P61. In rebuttal, the Respondents examined the driver of the Bus in question as RW-1 and marked 15 documents as Exs.R1 to R15. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 8. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part and held that the claimant is entitled for the compensation of Rs. 6,24,208/-, with interest at the rate of 9% per annum on Rs. 5,99,208/- from the date of petition till the date of realization. Further it is held that Respondent No. 1- KSRTC is liable to pay the compensation to the claimant. 9. Respondent No.1- the KSRTC, aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, filed this miscellaneous first appeal, challenging the liability and quantum of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 10. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the KSRTC and the learned counsel for the claimant. 11. The learned counsel for the KSRTC submits that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle. There is a contributory negligence on the part of the claimant. The Tribunal, without considering the said fact, held KSRTC liable for the payment - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 of compensation. It is submitted that the driver of the Bus in question has filed the complaint and FIR has been filed against the claimant for rash riding of the said motorcycle. It is further submitted that the Tribunal committed an error in assessing the compensation and the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is contrary to the evidence on records. Hence, on these grounds, prays to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. 12. Per contra, the learned counsel for the claimant, supports the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and submits that there is no contributory negligence on the part of the claimant. The Tribunal has rightly fastened the liability on the KSRTC and the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not require any interference. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the appeal. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 13. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 14. The point that would arise for consideration is about the liability and the quantum of compensation. Regarding the liability: 15. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident on 19/01/2019 and the injuries sustained by the claimant. To establish the case of the claimant, he has produced 61 documents and the Charge Sheet was marked as Ex.P4. The perusal of Ex.P4 clearly discloses that the charge sheet was filed against the claimant and the driver of the Bus in question for the rash and negligent driving and riding of the vehicles in question. Further the claimant admitted that he did not challenge the charge sheet filed against him. The said aspect was not properly considered by the Tribunal and the Tribunal ought to have fastened the liability on the claimant to some extent. From the perusal of Ex.P4 it is clear that there is contributory negligence on the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 part of the claimant. Though, the driver of the bus was more aggressive that the rider of the motorcycle in question, the accident occurred due to the negligence of both, the driver of the bus in question and the claimant. Hence, the Tribunal committed an error in fastening the 100% liability on the KSRTC. Thus, this court re-assesses the liability on the KSRTC to the extent of 90% and for the remaining 10%, the rider of the motor cycle is liable. Hence, the point on liability is answered accordingly. Regarding quantum of compensation: 16. It is the case of the claimant that he was working as a Technician and was getting a salary of Rs. 18000/- and other incentives. To prove the income, the claimant produced the pay slips for the month of May, June and July of 2020, as Exs.P11 to 13 and produced an employment certificate as Ex.P 15. However, he has not examined the author of Ex.P 15. Admittedly, the accident occurred in 2019. Thus, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 the claimant at Rs.13,250/-, i.e., the notional income for the year 2019, as per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Service Authorities as the autor of Ex.P 15 was not examined. Further, the claimant, to establish injury sustained by him, produced the wound certificate at Ex.P6 and examined the treated doctor as PW3, who assessed the disability at 47% to the whole body. The Tribunal assessed the disability at 15%, i.e., 1/3rd of the percentage of disability, assessed by the treated doctor. Hence, I do not find any error in the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore, the point for consideration regarding the quantum of compensation is answered accordingly. 17. Therefore, in view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order. ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, is hereby modified. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:9249 MFA No. 102753 of 2022 (iii) The *KSRTC is liable to pay the compensation to the extent of 90% of the amount awarded by the Tribunal i.e.,Rs.5,61,787/-(90% of Rs.6,24,208/-) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, as against the compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.6,24,208/- and for the remaining 10%, the rider of the motor cycle is liable. (iv) * The K S R T C is directed to deposit compensation amount with accrued interest as stated above, within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (v) The office is directed to transmit the TCR forthwith. (vi) Accordingly, the pending IAs, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE RHR/- CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12 * corrected vide chamber order Dated 17.09.2025 Sd/- (ASKJ)