- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24986-DB MFA No. 8048 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4646 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8048 OF 2015 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4646 OF 2016 (MV-I) IN MFA No. 8048/2015 BETWEEN: LEGAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD BRANCH OFFICE MAGANURU BASAPPA COMPLEX CHITRADURGA NOW REP BY ITS LEGAL MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD RGIC, NO.28, EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR CENTENARY BUILDING, M G ROAD BANGALORE-560 001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP B.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DADAPEER @ N R DADAPEER S/O RIZWAN SAB NOW AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS R/AT HORAPET CHITRADURGA-577501. Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24986-DB MFA No. 8048 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4646 of 2016 2. K B KHASIM S/O MOHAMMED TIPPU R/AT NAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE CHALLAKERE TALUK CHITRADURGA DIST-577501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M G KANTHARAJAPPA., ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 23.06.2025 NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.06.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.6/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND FORTH MACT AT CHITRADURGA, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.3,89,000/-WITH INTEREST @ 8% P.A FROM THE DATE OF THE PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT. IN MFA NO. 4646/2016 BETWEEN: DADAPEER @ N.R. DADAPEER S/O RIZWAN SAB, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, HORAPET, CHITRADURGA TOWN-577 501. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI.M.G. KANTHARAJAPPA, ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24986-DB MFA No. 8048 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4646 of 2016 AND: 1. K B KHASIM S/O MOHAMMED TIPPU, OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING REG NO.KA-16/SOUTH-4140, R/O NAYAKANAHALLI VILLAGE, CHALLKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 501. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD., BRANCH OFFICE MAGANURU BASAPPA COMPLEX, P.B. ROAD, CHITRADURGA-577 501. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRADEEP. B., ADVOCATE FOR R2 R1 SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.06.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.6/14 ON THE FILE OF THE 1ST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE,4TH MACT, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24986-DB MFA No. 8048 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4646 of 2016 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD) These appeals are as against the Judgment and Award dated 09.06.2015 in MVC No.6/2014 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and IV MACT, Chitradurga [for short, 'the Tribunal']. The Insurer's appeal is in MFA No.8048/2015, and the claimant's appeal is in MFA No.4646/2016. The Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.3,89,000/- (rounded off) with interest at 8% per annum as compensation to the claimant under the following heads: Sl. No. Description Amount in (Rs) 1 Pain and Sufferings Rs. 50,000/- 2 Medical and incidental Expenses Rs.1,00,000/- 3 Permanent disability (10% of Rs.6,500x12x16) Rs.1,24,800/- 4 Future prospectus (50% of Rs.6,500x12) Rs. 39,000/- 5 Loss of amenities Rs. 25,000/- 6 Future expenses Rs. 25,000/- 7 Cost of litigation Rs. 25,000/- Total Rs.3,88,800/- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24986-DB MFA No. 8048 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4646 of 2016 2. The claimant's case is that on 22.09.2009 he was travelling on the pillion of a motorcycle, and at about 06:30 p.m., because the rider of the two- wheeler was rash and negligent, he fell down and suffered a fracture of the right tibia and fibula. The Insurer, relying upon Ex.P.4 [the wound certificate], proposes to contest the Tribunal's finding that the claimant has established that he was the pillion rider. On perusal of the Wound Certificate [Ex.P.4], this Court must observe that the claimant was brought to the hospital with a history of a road traffic accident and he was on the pillion. 3. The Tribunal, because the Wound Certificate records that the claimant was on the pillion and the charge sheet is filed against the rider and that the Insurer has produced no documentary evidence to disbelieve this evidence, has concluded that the claimant was travelling as a pillion rider. If the Insurer proposes to undermine the probative - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24986-DB MFA No. 8048 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4646 of 2016 value of the certificate, it should have examined a witness, but it has not. In the light of the Tribunal's finding and this Court's own finding on the probative value of the entry in Ex.P.4 - the Wound Certificate, though the learned counsel for the Insurer strenuously argues that this Court must interfere with the Tribunal's finding, this Court is not persuaded. The Insurer must therefore fail in its appeal on the ground of liability. 4. The Tribunal has assessed the claimant’s disability at 10% and has granted compensation towards loss of future earning taking the income of the deceased at Rs.6,500/- per month while providing for an addition of 50% for future prospects. It is pointed out that the addition of 50% towards future prospects would be unjustified as the addition, even if the claimant was 35 years, could not have been over 40%. It is also argued that the income could not have been taken at Rs.6,500/- per month - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24986-DB MFA No. 8048 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4646 of 2016 because there is no proof of actual income and the notional income, relevant to the year, will only be Rs.5,000/-. 5. On behalf of the claimant the assertion is that the licenses issued by the concerned Village Panchayat would show that he was running a kirana shop and also sell kerosene, but those certificates have no evidentiary value because the necessary corroborating circumstances are not brought on record. Further, it remains indisputable that the license to sell kerosene could not have been issued by the Panchayat. 6. This Court is not persuaded to opine that there must be any moderation in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal because [a] the evidence is that the claimant was hospitalized for about 29 days on three occasions and [b] the claimant would be entitled for loss of income during the laid-up period - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24986-DB MFA No. 8048 of 2015 C/W MFA No. 4646 of 2016 which, given the number of surgeries and the hospitalization, should have been for a minimum of three months. This Court opines that the compensation awarded is just and reasonable, and therefore, there is no reason for interference even on the ground of quantum either at the instance of the Insurer or the claimant. The appeals therefore stand disposed of directing the Registry to transfer the amount in deposit to the Tribunal for due disbursement. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE Sd/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE SA ct:sr