- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40533-DB MFA No. 2391 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2391 OF 2016(MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2150 OF 2016(MV-I) IN MFA No. 2391/2016 BETWEEN: M/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED OFFICE NO. 198/7, BAZAR STREET, 5TH MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU, NOW REP. BY ITS REGIONAL OFFICE, 6TH FLOOR, KRISHI BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU-560 001, REP. BY ITS MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. A.M VENKATESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VIMAL KHINVASARA S/O. K.M. KHINVASARA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/O. NO. 123, RANGASWAMY TEMPLE STREET, BENGALURU-560 053. REP BY FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, B.M. KHINVASARA, S/O. BALCHAND, AGED ABOUT 92 YEARS, R/AT ABOVE ADDRESS. 2. SHAHID-UR-REHAMAN S/O. GHOUSE PASHA, Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40533-DB MFA No. 2391 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2016 AGED MAJOR, NO.484, GULJARIA AHAMED STREET, CHANNAPATNA, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-571 501. 3. SHIVALINGAPPA S/O. NARASAPPA, AGED 51 YEARS, HARALAHALLI, HOSAKOTE POST, MADHUGIRI TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-572 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K.T GURUDEVA PRASAD, ADVOCATE FOR R1, VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 21.02.2022, NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT BY WAY OF PAPER PUBLICATION, R3-SERVED, UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:05.11.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.3208/1998 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXXIV ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,66,05,645/- IN MFA NO. 2150/2016 BETWEEN: SRI VIMAL KHINVASARA S/O B.M.KHINVASARA, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.123, RANGASWAMY TEMPLE STREET, BANGALORE-53. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K.T, ADVOCATE) - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40533-DB MFA No. 2391 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2016 AND: 1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD NO.198/7, BAZAR STREET, 5TH MAIN ROAD, YESWANTHAPURA, BANGALORE-22, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER. 2. 3. SRI SHAHID-UR-REHMAN S/O SRI.GHOUSE PASHA, MAJOR, NO.484, GULJARIA AHMED STREET, CHANNAPATNA 571501. BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. SHIVALINGAPPA S/O NARASAPPA AGED 54 YEARS HARALAHALLI, HOSAKOTE POST MADHUGIRI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. A.M VENKATESH, ADVOCATE FOR R1, VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 22.07.2016, NOTICE TO IMPLEADING R3 IS DISPENSED WITH. VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 03.06.2019, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 05.11.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.3208/1998 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, & XXXIV ACMM, MEMBER, MACT-7, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40533-DB MFA No. 2391 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2016 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K) 1. In respect of an accident, which is not in dispute and which has occurred on 04.07.1997, the Tribunal vide judgment and award dated 01.06.2007 has awarded a sum of Rs.78,69,758/- as compensation attributing negligence at the ratio of 25% on the claimant and 75% on the driver of the offending vehicle. The said award was challenged before this Court, while the claimant filed MFA.14273/2007 challenging the attribution of negligence as well as quantum, the insurer filed MFA.7995/2008 challenging the quantum. This Court vide judgment dated 06.11.2014 disposed of the said appeals setting aside the finding of the Tribunal in respect of negligence and remanded the matter for reconsideration to assess the quantum of compensation under all heads. 2. On remand, the Tribunal vide judgment and award dated 05.11.2015 has awarded a sum of Rs.1,66,05,645/- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40533-DB MFA No. 2391 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2016 as compensation. Challenging the said award, both the claimant and the insurer are in appeal in MFA.No.2150/2016 and MFA.2391/2016 respectively. 3. Learned counsel for the claimant contends that having regard to the disability suffered by the claimant and having regard to the evidence of the Neuro Surgeon and his dependency on others throughout his life, the Tribunal ought to have assessed the permanent physical and functional disability of the claimant at 100% instead of 75%. He also contends that the Tribunal has failed to consider the future prospects as the claimant had been appointed for the post of Financial Analyst and the salary for the said post had been offered at Rs.2,10,000/- per month in Indian currency. He also contends that the Tribunal has failed to award any interest on the amount of compensation awarded. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal of the claimant by enhancing the compensation. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40533-DB MFA No. 2391 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2016 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the insurer contends that on remand, though the driver of the bus was examined, the Tribunal has failed to record any finding on the question of negligence since this Court earlier held the driver of the offending vehicle negligent only on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle was not examined. He further contends that the Tribunal has not deducted the tax from the income of the claimant before assessing the income of the claimant. He also contends that assessment of disability at 75% by the Tribunal was improper and it is higher, since the Tribunal has not considered the medical opinion of the Medical Board in proper perspective. As such, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under all the heads is exorbitant. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal of the insurer. 5. Having perused the award of the Tribunal and the earlier judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the aforesaid appeals, it is evident that the contention of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40533-DB MFA No. 2391 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2016 the insurer in respect of negligence on the part of the claimant was dealt with and the finding of the Tribunal attributing negligence at the ratio of 25% on the claimant was set aside. Though a contention was raised by the learned counsel for the insurer that after remand, the driver of the bus was examined before the Tribunal and his evidence reveals the negligence on the part of the claimant, the same cannot be accepted since there is no conclusive proof/evidence to that effect. 6. As regards quantum of compensation, we have carefully perused the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal, which depicts that the Tribunal, after re- appreciating the evidence and after considering the income of the claimant based on his qualification i.e., MBA degree obtained at reputed University i.e., University of Scranton, USA and also considering the avocation at Moskowitz Capital Consultancy in Newyord and the salary of the claimant i.e., 2,700 US dollars per month after deduction of tax which is equivalent to Rs.1,00,000/- - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40533-DB MFA No. 2391 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2016 which was based on the authenticated documents placed by the claimant, has correctly assessed the income of the claimant. 7. Having considered the evidence of PW.3, the neuro surgeon of Santhosh Hospital, Bengaluru and the disability certificate as per Ex.P37 and having considered other aspects i.e., the injuries sustained by the claimant, his hospitalization and also his dependency on others, the Tribunal has correctly assessed the disability of the claimant at 75% and has correctly awarded the compensation under all the heads, which does not call for any interference by this Court as we find the same just and fair compensation. 8. However, since the Tribunal has not awarded any interest on the amount of compensation, we find it just to award interest as per Section 34 of CPC at the rate of 6% p.a. Accordingly, the award of the Tribunal is modified only to the extent of awarding of interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till its realization. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:40533-DB MFA No. 2391 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2016 9. Accordingly, the appeal of the claimant is allowed in part and the appeal of the insurer is dismissed. 10. The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the Tribunal. SD/- (D K SINGH) JUDGE SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PKS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24