- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9714 OF 2017 (MV-I) BETWEEN: DORESWAMY H.S. S/O M B SHIVAPPA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS RESIDENT AT 5TH CROSS SHANTHINAGARA EXTENSION , HASSAN CITY HASSAN 573201 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHETHAN B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. H. N. UMESH S/O NAGEGOWDA MAJOR RESIDING AT HOSURU VILLAGE KIRUGADALU POST, ALUR TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT 573201 2. THE MANAGER THE IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED 3RD FLOOR, LALBAG TOWER BALLALABAG, M G ROAD MANGALORE 575003 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYA PHANEENDRA T B , ADVOCATE FOR SRI A N KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 R1 IS SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.12.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.1328/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE, & ADDITIONAL MACT, HASSAN, PARTLY YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: HIGHCOURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed by the claimant under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 19881 challenging the judgment and award dated 01.12.2016 passed in MVC No.1328/2015 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Additional MACT, Hassan2. 2. The Tribunal vide its judgment and award dated 01.12.2016 has awarded a total compensation of `3,01,259/- together with interest at 6% per annum on `2,76,259/-. However, the Tribunal has recorded a finding that the driver of the insured vehicle did not have an effective driving licence as on the date of the accident. Hence, the Tribunal has exonerated respondent No.2 – insurer from payment of the compensation and fastened the liability to pay the compensation awarded on 1 Hereinafter referred as to ‘Act’ 2 Hereinafter referred as to ‘Tribunal’ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 respondent No.1 – owner of the vehicle. Being aggrieved, the claimant has filed the present appeal challenging the judgment and award of the Tribunal on liability as also seeking for enhancement of quantum of compensation. 3. Heard submissions of the learned counsel Sri Chethan B appearing for the appellant/claimant and learned counsel Sri Vijaya Phaneendra TB appearing for learned counsel Sri AN Krishna Sway appearing for respondent No.2/insurer. Respondent No.1/owner is served and unrepresented. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant contends that although, the driver of the insured vehicle did not have a valid driving licence as on the date of the accident, having regard to the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of BAJAJ ALLIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., V/S RAMBHA DEVI3 and MUKUND DEWANGAN V/S ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED4, it is required to be held that the insurer is liable to pay the compensation awarded with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the 3 “(2025)3 SCC 95” 4 “(2017)14 SCC 663” - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 vehicle. It is further contended that the quantum of compensation awarded is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced. 5. Learned counsel for the insurer justifies the finding of the Tribunal on liability and quantum of compensation. However, learned counsel does not dispute the proposition of law as contended by the learned counsel for the claimant. 6. The contentions put forth by both the learned counsels have been considered and the material on record, including the records of the Tribunal, have been perused. The questions that arise for consideration are: i. Whether the finding of the Tribunal exonerating the insurer from payment of compensation awarded is just and proper? ii. Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is liable to be enhanced?” - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 Reg. Question (i):- 7. The Tribunal while adjudicating the aspect of liability, by noticing testimony of RW.2 and driving licence extract (Ex.R1) has recorded a finding that the driver was issued a licence for the period 17.07.2010 to 16.07.2030 he was authorized to drive motor cycle with gear and Light Motor Vehicle5 (three wheeler non transport). Having regard to the date of accident i.e., on 13.06.2015 it is clear that the driver held a valid driving license as on date of the accident. However, the insured vehicle is an ape goods auto which is contended to be a transport vehicle. 8. A constitution Bench of this Court in the case of BAJAJ ALLIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE3 affirmed the judgment of MUKUND DEWANGAN4 and held that regardless of whether the vehicle falls into ‘transport’ or ‘non-transport’ categories, if the gross vehicle weight is within 7500 kgs, the holder of a LMV licence can also drive a ‘transport vehicle’. 5 Hereinafter referred to as the ‘LMV’ - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 9. It is clear from the proposition of law as mentioned above that a person who is a holder of a licence to drive a three wheeler is also entitled to drive the said three wheelers if it is a goods vehicle, as long as the gross weight of the vehicle was less than 7,500/- kgs. In the present case the insured vehicle weight is less than 7,500/- kgs. Hence, the insurer is liable to pay the compensation awarded with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. To the said extent the finding of the Tribunal is required to be modified. 10. In view of the discussion made above, question (i) framed for consideration is answered in partly in the affirmative. Reg. Question (ii):- 11. The claimant is stated to be 30 years as on the date of the accident i.e., as on 13.07.2015. The Tribunal has applied the appropriate multiplier ‘17’ which is just and proper. 12. The claimant is stated to be an electrician and earning `25,000/- per month. However, no documents have been produced to demonstrate his income. The Tribunal has - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 assessed the notional income of the claimant as `7,000/- per month. However, having regard to the date of the accident the notional income of the claimant is re-assessed as `9,000/- per month. 13. It is evident from the wound certificate (Ex.P5), discharge summary (Ex.P9) and the testimony of the doctor (PW.3) as well as other medical evidence on record that the claimant has sustained commuted fracture of the right patella as well as right tibia. The claimant was treated as an inpatient for a total period of six days. The doctor has deposed that the claimant is having a permanent disability in respect of the right lower limb to an extent of 31.8%. The Tribunal appreciating the same, has assessed the permanent disability of the claimant to the whole body as 10.6%, which is just and proper. 14. Having regard to the aforementioned, the compensation is re-assessed as follows: i. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards injury pain and suffering in a sum of `50,000/- and future medical expenses at `25,000/- are just and proper; - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 ii. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of `66,491/- towards medical expenses which is as per the medical bills produced by the claimant, which is just and proper and is rounded of as `67,000/-; iii. Laid up period is assessed as two months and the loss of earning during laid up period is re-assessed as (`9,000/- X 2)= `18,000/- as against `1,400/- awarded by the Tribunal; iv. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the period of treatment, the compensation towards conveyance, food, nourishment and attendant charges is re-assessed as `10,000/- as against `7,000/- awarded by the Tribunal; v. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the resultant disability, it is just and proper to award `25,000/- towards loss of amenities; vi. Loss of future earning capacity is re-assessed as (9000 X 12 X 17 X 10.6%)= `1,94,616/- as against `1,51,368/- awarded by the Tribunal; - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 15. Hence, the compensation re-assessed is as follows: Sl.No Compensation Head Amount Awarded by the Tribunal (`) Amount awarded by this Court (`) 1 Pain and suffering 50000.00 50000.00 2 Medical expenses 66491.00 67000.00 3 Future medical expenses 25000.00 25000.00 4 Loss of earning during treatment 1400.00 18000.00 5 Loss of future earning capacity 151368.00 194616.00 6 Conveyance, food, nourishment and attendant charges 7000.00 10000.00 7 Loss of amenities 00.00 25000.00 Total 301259.00 389616.00 16. Accordingly, question (ii) framed for consideration is answered in the affirmative. The Claimant is entitled to an enhanced compensation of (`3,89,616/- - `3,01,259/-) `88,357/- rounded of to `89,000/-. 17. Taking judicial notice of the rate of interest awarded towards fixed deposits, interest on the enhanced compensation is assessed as 7% pa. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 18. In view of the aforementioned, the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part; ii) The judgment and award dated 01.12.2016 passed in MVC No.1328/2015 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Additional MACT, Hassan, is hereby modified to the extent ordered herein. In all other respects, the judgment and award of the Tribunal remains unaltered; iii) The claimant is entitled to further compensation of `89,000/- together with interest at 7% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of payment in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal; iv) The insurer (respondent No.2 before the Tribunal / respondent No.2 herein) is liable to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal as well as enhancement made by this Court with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the vehicle (respondent No.1 before the Tribunal / respondent No.1 herein). The said compensation shall be deposited within a period of six weeks; - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27534 MFA No. 9714 of 2017 v) Upon such deposit, the compensation together with interest accrued thereupon be disbursed to the claimant in terms of the award of the Tribunal; vi) The Registry to draw the modified award accordingly; No costs. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE PNV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44