- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101252 OF 2021 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100866 OF 2021(MV-D) IN MFA NO.101252/2021 BETWEEN: SHRI. DINESH S/O. PRAKASH RAMJI AGE 23 YEARS, OCC TRAINEE FITTER, NOW NIL, R/O KAMAT GALLI, BELGAVI-590016. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. SUNANDA P. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NWKRTC, BELAGAVI DEPOT, BELAGAVI-590001. 2. SMT.RUPA W/O. RAJESH ZAMBAULIKAR AGE:35 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O HOUSE NO.105, ZAMBAULIM RIVONA, NEAR DAMODAR TEMPLE, AT QUEPEM, SOUTH GOA-403705. Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ INSURANCE CO. LTD., CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI-590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY MISS. VAISHALI KALADGI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI. RAVINDRA R. MANE ADVOCATE FOR R3 R2 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED.) THIS MEMORANDUM OF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL U/S.173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO, ALLOW THE APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.01.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.2375/2018 AND ETC. IN MFA NO.100866/2021: BETWEEN: 1. SMT. ANJANA W/O. TANAJI TIBILE, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOULD WORK, R/O: HOUSE NO. 16, 2ND CROSS, SUBHASH GALLI, OLD GANDHI NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590016 2. SHRI. TANAJI S/O. DHONDIBA TIBILE AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE JOB, R/O: HOUSE NO. 16, 2ND CROSS, SUBHASH GALLI, OLD GANDHI NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590016 3. KUMARI NARAYAN S/O. TANAJI TIBILE AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: HOUSE NO. 16, 2ND CROSS, SUBHASH GALLI, OLD GANDHI NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590016 …APPELLANTS (BY SMT. SUNANDA P. PATIL, ADVOCATE) - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 AND: 1. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NWKRTC, BELAGAVI DEPOT, BELAGAVI-590001. 2. SMT.RUPA W/O. RAJESH ZAMBAULIKAR AGE:35 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS, R/O HOUSE NO.105, ZAMBAULIM RIVONA, NEAR DAMODAR TEMPLE, AT QUEPEM, SOUTH GOA-403705. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER BAJAJ ALLIANZ INSURANCE CO. LTD., CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI-590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY MISS. VAISHALI KALADGI, ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI. RAVINDRA R. MANE ADVOCATE FOR R3 R2 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED.) THIS MEMORANDUM OF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL U/S.173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO, ALLOW THE APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.01.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.2374/2018 AND ETC. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THEIR IN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M. SHYAM PRASAD) These appeals are by the claimants in MVC Nos.2374 and 2375 of 2018 on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge and Member of Additional MACT, Belagavi [for short, ‘the Tribunal’]. The appeal in MFA No.101252/2021 is against the Tribunal’s award in MVC No.2375/2018, and the appeal in MFA No.100866/2021 is against the Tribunal’s award in MVC No.2374/2018. 2. The Tribunal has granted to the claimant in MVC No.2375/2018 a sum of Rs.9,12,640/- with interest 6% per annum. The Tribunal has granted to the claimants in MVC No.2374/2018 a total sum of Rs.13,05,000/- with interest at 6% per annum. The claimant in MVC No.2375/2018 is injured in the accident. The claimants in MVC No.2374/2018 are the dependents of the deceased Damodar Tanaji Tibile, and they are - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 his parents and a sibling. The claimant in MVC No.2375/2018 is granted a sum of Rs.9,12,640/- under the following separate heads: Sl No. Description Amount 1 Pain and Suffering Rs.50,000/- 2 Loss of income during the laid-up period Rs.14,000/- 3 Loss of earning capacity 6,35,040/- 4 Loss of amenities Rs.10,000/- 5 Medical Expenses Rs.1,77,600/- 6. Incidental Expenses Rs.26,000/- Total Rs.9,12,640/- The claimants in MVC No.2374/2018 are granted a sum of Rs.13,05,000/- under the following separate heads: Sl No. Description Amount 1 Loss of dependency Rs.12,75,000.00 2 Loss of love and affection Rs.10,000.00 3 Loss of estate Rs.10,000.00 4 Funeral expenses Rs.10,000.00 Total Rs.13,05,000.00 - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 3. It is undisputed that the injured and deceased were involved in a road accident on 27.08.2018 when they were travelling in a Car with the deceased at the steering. The accident involved a Bus bearing registration No. KA-42/F-1422 and owned by a Road Transport Corporation [the Transport Corporation], and this Bus was coming from the opposite direction. The Tribunal has found the Transport Corporation’s driver negligent, and it has fasten the liability on the Corporation. The owner and the Insurer of the Car are absolved of any liability. The claimants in their appeals have sought for enhancement of compensation. IN MFA No. 101252/2021 in MVC No.2375/2018 4. Smt. Sunanda P. Patil canvasses the following for enhancement in appeal with a rebuttal by Smt. Vaishali Kaladagi. Smt. Sunanda P. Patil’s submissions are as captured hereafter. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 4.1 The injured has suffered multiple fractures in his face resulting in loss of vision in the left eye and partial vision in the right eye apart from injury in the spine. The claimant has examined Dr. S.R. Angadi [PW.6] and Dr. Siddharth S. Pujari [PW.7] to establish the extent of permanent disability. Dr. S.R. Angadi is an orthopedic surgeon, and he has spoken about the multiple fractures in the face. The Doctor has opined that the disability will be 17% of the whole body with the claimant suffering disability of 40% because of the fracture of paranasal bones and 15% because of the fracture of left pedicle of cervical C-4 vertebra. 4.2 Dr. Siddharth S. Pujari has opined that the claimant has lost vision in the left eye and he has 10% vision in the right eye and he has difficulty in walking and he complains of giddiness. This Doctor has opined that the permanent disability is 75%. The Tribunal, in the light of this evidence, has - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 opined that the claimant has suffered a disability of 42%. However, with multiple fractures in the neck and loss of vision in one eye and impaired vision in the other eye, the Tribunal should have taken the permanent disability at 64% i.e., 47% towards loss of vision and 17% towards the loss of disability. 4.3 The evidence on record is that the injured was engaged as a Trainee Fitter with a Government organization and that he was being paid Rs.10,000/- per month as stipend. The Tribunal has taken the monthly income at Rs.7,000/- per month overlooking the fact that the claimant’s future earning capacity is reduced with the loss of vision and disability. The amount towards pain and suffering, loss of income during the laid-up period and loss of amenities must be enhanced. This Court’s reasoning: 4.4 There is no dispute that the injuries suffered by the claimant have affected his functional - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 ability and his earning capacity. The Doctor has opined the permanent disability, but the Tribunal, based on all circumstances, must decide on the functional disability for awarding just and reasonable compensation. Though the claimant states that he was a Trainee Fitter at the time of the accident, he has not spoken about the loss of his employment opportunity as a fitter. This must also be considered while deciding on the reduced functional ability, but the diminution in the opportunity is undeniable. As such, this Court is not persuaded to opine that the Tribunal has erred in taking the permanent disability at 45% for deciding on the just and reasonable compensation towards loss of earning ability. 4.5 However, this Court must opine that the Tribunal has erred in taking the income of the claimant at Rs.7,000/- per month despite the evidence that he was engaged as a Trainee Fitter at the time of accident. It is undisputed that when there - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 is no evidence but permanent disability is established, the Courts adopt the Schedule evolved for settlement in Lok Adalat for reasons of uniformity and consistency. In the cases arising out of accidents in the year 2018, the monthly salary, even when the injured/ victim is an unskilled labour, is taken at Rs.11,750/-. 4.6 This Court is of the considered opinion that loss of future earning must be computed taking the monthly income at Rs.11,750/- with an appropriate addition towards the future prospects at 40%. If the loss of earning capacity is calculated thus, the claimant will be entitled to a sum of Rs.15,98,940/- as against the sum of Rs.6,35,040/- awarded by the Tribunal. Description Amount [In Rs.] Monthly Income - A 11,750.00 Addition of 40% future aspects towards monthly income - B 4,700.00 A + B 16,450.00 - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 Annual Income with addition towards future prospects 1,97,400.00 Loss of earning capacity with 45% as disability and 18 as multiplier 15,98,940.00 4.7 The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities, despite the evidence that the claimant has suffered multiple fractures including the injury in the neck as also loss of vision in one eye and impaired vision in the other eye. The Doctor [PW.6] has mentioned both in his evidence and his Certificate that the claimant has suffered seven fractures in the face. Further, the evidence on record is that the claimant was hospitalized for almost for over a month and is convalescing for the further period. In the circumstances, this Court is of the view that the claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 towards pain and suffering and Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of amenities in life. Description Amount By the Tribunal [In Rs.] Amount by this Court [in Rs.] Pain and Suffering 50,000.00 1,00,000.00 Loss of income during the laid-up period 14,000.00 23,500.00 Loss of earning capacity 6,35,040.00 15,98,940.00 Loss of Amenities 10,000.00 1,00,000.00 Medical Expenses 1,77,600.00 1,77,600.00 Incidental Expenses 26,000.00 26,000.00 Total 9,12,640.00 20,26,040.00 Enhancement 11,13,400.00 The claimant will be entitled for a sum of Rs.11,13,400.00/-. IN MFA No. 100866/2021 in MVC No.2374/2018 5. Smt. Sunanda P. Patil canvasses the following for enhancement in this appeal with a - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 rebuttal by Smt. Vaishali Kaladagi. Smt. Sunanda P. Patil’s submissions are as captured hereafter. 5.1 The claimants contend that the deceased Damodar Tanaji Jigane was working as a Deck Steward / Catering Assistant on an International Cruiser and that he was being paid salary in US Dollars. The deceased’s pay slips issued by the employer have been marked as exhibits and these documents show that the claimant was being paid in US Dollars, and the Tribunal has therefore, erred in taking his income in a paltry sum of Rs.10,000/- per month. 5.2 On behalf of the Corporation, the reliance is upon the Tribunal’s finding at para No.19 of the impugned order. The employer has not been examined to establish the probative value of the pay slips and the claimants have also not produced the Bank statements or the income tax details. As such, the Tribunal has rightly taken the deceased’s income - 14 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 nationally at Rs.10,000/- per month. The rejoinder is that an application was filed to summon the employer who also appeared before the Court with the documents, but he is not examined for want of time on that day and thereafter the witness has not been summoned once again. This Court’s reasoning: 5.3 These rival submissions are considered in the light of not just the pay slips but also the deceased’s employment records. These documents are marked as Exhibits P.32 to 34. These documents show that the deceased had successfully completed his training period as a Deck Steward, had travelled abroad as an employee of a Cruise and was also medically certified fit for service at Sea. These documents establish that the deceased was not just an unskilled labour, and that he was a Deck Steward. Thus, it is established that the deceased was employed for maintenance of the setup on a Deck - 15 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 including the deck Catering. Therefore, he must be treated as a skilled labour. 5.4 In the absence of any evidence of actual income, an addition to a sum of Rs.11,500/-, a sum which is adopted for settlement in the case of unskilled labour, must be made. The addition must be to ensure that there is just and reasonable compensation. This Court on a complete reading of the circumstances is of the view that computation towards loss of dependency must be taking the income of the deceased at Rs.15,000/- [Rs.11,500/- + Rs.3,500/-] per month. Further, the addition towards future prospects, as the deceased was aged 26 years at the time of accident and was employed, must be at 40%. The deduction, though argued must be only 1/3rd, must be 50% because the deceased has died a bachelor living behind his parents and sibling as dependents. If the loss of dependency is thus computed, it will be a sum of Rs. 21,42,000/-. - 16 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 Computation of Loss of Dependency [In Rs.] Monthly Income 15,000.00 Addition towards future Prospects at 40% 6,000.00 Monthly Income with Future prospects 21,000.00 Deduction at 50% towards personal expenses 10,500.00 Annual Income after deduction of 50% towards personal expenses 1,26,000.00 Multiplier 17 Loss of dependency 21,42,000.00 The claimants will be entitled to amounts towards Loss of Consortium and the other conventional heads with escalation at 10% as the accident is of the year 2018. The loss of consortium must be at Rs.4000/- for each of three claimants. The claimants will be entitled to Rs.30,000/- with enhancement towards funeral expenses and transportation cost. The compensation with the comparison and enhancement will be as follows. - 17 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 Description of Heads By the Tribunal [In Rs.] By this Court [In Rs.] Loss of dependency 12,75,000.00 21,42,000.00 Loss of Love and affection 10,000.00 Loss of Estate 10,000.00 1,32,000.00 [awarded as loss of consortium] Funeral Expenses 10,000.00 33,000.00 13,05,000.00 23,07,000.00 Enhancement 10,02,000.00 The claimants will be entitled for enhancement in a sum of Rs.10,02,000/-. The apportionment amongst the claimants shall be in the proportion as directed by the Tribunal. ORDER [a] The appeals are allowed in part. [b] The claimant in MFA No. 101252/2021 is granted enhanced compensation in a sum of Rs.11,13,400/- along with interest at 6% per annum, and the - 18 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 claimants in MFA No. 100866/2021 are allowed enhancement in a sum of Rs.10,02,000/- with interest at 6% per annum. [c] The Transport Corporation is called upon to deposit the enhanced compensation amount along with interest at 6% from the date of the claim petition with the Tribunal till deposit within eight [8] weeks. [d] The office is directed to transfer the Trial Court Records expeditiously. [e] The Tribunal is directed to disburse the enhancement amounts to the respective claimants without insisting - 19 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2389-DB MFA No. 101252 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 100866 of 2021 on deposit subject to identity. SD/- (B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SD/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE PJ LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 26