- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100324 OF 2016 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100922 OF 2015 MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103239 OF 2015 (MV-I) IN MFA No. 100324/2016 BETWEEN: 1. SHRI. SIDDALINGAPPA S/O SIDDAPPA SIDDAYYANAVAR, AGE: 48 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS (NOW NIL) R/O: MUTWAD, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. VIJAYAKUMAR K. KOTIN, ADV) AND: 1. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER 1ST FLOOR, MINI VIDHANASOUDHA, BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI (OWNER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REG.NO.KA-24/G-03) 2. THE DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE GOVT. INSURANCE DEPARTMENT, MOTOR VEHICLE SECTION, 16TH FLOOR, VISHWESHWARAYYA KENDRA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560001 (INSURER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REG.NO.KA-24/G-03) 3. SRI. MANJUNATH SIDRAY SIDAYYANAVAR AGE: MAJOR, AT POST: MUTAWAD, R/O: KAVERI KODI ROAD, KUNDAPUR, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI, MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.27 11:23:29 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 (OWNER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REG.NO.KA-24/J-5894) 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., MERCHANTS BANK BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR, S R CIRCLE, BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI, CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI (INSURER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING REG.NO.KA-24/J-5894) POL.NO.472203/31/2013/413) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R1 & R2, SRI. S.V. YAJI, ADV FOR R4 NOTICE TO R3 IS SERVED) THIS MFA ISFILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.12.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.2719/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER ADDL. MACT, BAILHONGAL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN MFA NO. 100922/2015 BETWEEN: 1. THE BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., MERCHANTS BANK BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR, S.R.CIRCLE, BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI. R/BY THE DEPUTY MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, LAMINGTON ROAD, HUBBALLI. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. S V YAJI., ADV) AND: 1. SIDDALINGAPPA SIDDAPPA SIDDAYYANAVAR, AGED: 48 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 (NOW NILL), R/O: MUTWAD, TQ: SAUDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, 1ST FLOOR MINI VIDHANSOUDHA, BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. THE DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA STATE GOVERNMENT INSURANCE DEPARTMENT MOTOR VEHICLE SECTION, 16TH FLOOR, VISHWESHWARAYYA KENDRA, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU-560 001. 4. SHRI. MANJUNATH SIDRAY SIDAYYANAVAR, AGE:MAJOR, AT POST: MUTAWAD, R/O: KAVERI KODI ROAD, KUNDAPUR, TQ: SAUDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYKUMAR K. KOTIN, ADV FOR R1, SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP FOR R2 & R3, NOTICE R4 IS SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.12.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.2719/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER ADDITIONAL MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BAILHONGAL, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.2,10,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT. IN MFA NO. 103239/2015 BETWEEN: 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN & CHILD WELFARE DEVELOPMENT M S BUILDING, BENGALURU-01. 2. THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT OFFICER - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 1ST FLOOR, MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. THE DIRECTOR ,KARNATAKA STATE GOVERNMENT INSURANCE DEPARTMENT, MOTOR VEHICLE SECTION, 16TH FLOOR, V.V.TPWER, DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU-560001. ...APPELLANTS (BY SRI. ABHISHEK MALIPATIL, HCGP) AND: 1. SHRI. SIDDALINGAPPA SIDDAPPA SIDDAYYANAVAR, AGE: 45 YEARS OCC: BUSINESS (NOW NIL), R/O: MUTWAD TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI 2. SHRI. MANJUNATH SIDRAY SIDAYYANAVAR AGE: MAJOR, AT POST: MUTAWAD R/O: KAVERI KODI ROAD, KUNDAPUR TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD MERCHANTS BANK BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR, S.R.CIRCLE, BAILHONGAL, DIST:BELAGAVI, CLUB ROAD BELAGAVI. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VIJAYKUMAR K. KOTIN, ADV FOR R1, SRI. S.V. YAJI, ADV FOR R3. NOTICE TO R2 IS SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.12.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.2719/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MEMBER ADDL. MACT, BAILHONGAL, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.2,10,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. These Appeals are filed, challenging the same judgment and award dated 30.12.2014 passed in MVC No.2719/2012 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Bailhongal (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’, for short). 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of these appeals are as follows: 3. On 26.05.2012, the petitioner was riding Bajaj motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-24/J-5894 towards Sanikoppa village on Bailhongal-Belgaum road at a moderate speed and when he came near the spot of the accident, at that time, the driver of the Mahindra Company Jeep bearing registration No.KA-24/G-03, going in front of the motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner, without giving signal or indication, all of a sudden, turned the jeep on the road and thereby the accident occurred, and the petitioner fell down, and sustained injuries. The - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 petitioner filed a claim petition under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking for compensation for the account of the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. 4. Respondent Nos.1 and 3 before the tribunal are the owners of the jeep and motorcycle, respectively. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 filed a common statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition, and denied that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing registration No.KA-24/G-03. It is contended that the driver possessed a valid and effective driving license as of the date of accident and hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the owner and insurer i.e., respondent Nos.1 and 2, before the tribunal. 5. Respondent No.3 i.e., the owner of the motorcycle filed a statement of objections denying the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 averments made in the claim petition and contended that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the jeep bearing registration No.KA-24G-03. It is contended that the rider of the motorcycle possessed a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident and accordingly, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the owner of the motorcycle. 6. The insurance company of the motorcycle i.e., respondent No.4 before the tribunal filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petitions, and contended that the rider of the motorcycle did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the insurance company. 7. The tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 8. The petitioner, to substantiate his case examined himself as PW.1, examined the doctor as PW.2 and marked 22 documents as Exs.P1 to P22. In rebuttal, the respondents before the tribunal, examined 2 witnesses as RWs.1 and 2 and marked one document as EX.R1. 9. The tribunal after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence allowed the claim petitions in part vide judgment dated 30.12.2014 and awarded a compensation of Rs.2,10,000/- with current and future interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of the petition till deposit, and held respondent Nos.1 & 2 and 3 & 4 are jointly liable to pay the compensation in equal proportion at the ratio of 50:50, and directed the respondents i.e., the insurers of both vehicle to deposit the compensation amount in the ratio of 50:50. 10. The petitioner, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation filed an appeal in MFA - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 No.100324/2016, respondent No.4 i.e., insurer of the motorcycle filed an appeal in MFA No.100922/2015 and the Government filed an appeal in MFA No.103239/2015. 11. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties in all the appeals. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is on lower side. He also submits that the petitioner to prove the disability examined a doctor as PW.2, who opined that the petitioner has suffered a permanent disability, and the doctor has assessed the disability to the extent of 25% to the left lower limb, and 25% to the upper limb. The tribunal has assessed the disability at 16% which is on lower side. Hence, on these grounds, prays to allow the appeal, and dismiss the appeal filed by the government, and insurance company. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 13. Per contra, learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the tribunal committed an error in fastening the liability to the extent of 50% on the insurance company i.e., Oriental insurance company. The liability fastened on the insurance company is on a higher side. He submits that the driver of jeep drove the vehicle more aggressively than the rider of the motorcycle. He submits that the tribunal should have assessed the liability to the extent of 75% on the driver of the vehicle and 25% on the rider of the motorcycle. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal and dismiss the appeals filed by the petitioner and the Government. 14. Learned counsel for the learned High Court Government Pleader submits that the apportionment of 50:50 is on higher side. He submits that the rider of the motorcycle has contributed to the accident more than the driver of the jeep. The tribunal could - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 have fastened the entire liability on the rider of the motorcycle. Thus, the tribunal has committed an error in saddling the liability at the ratio of 50:50. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal filed by the state and dismiss the appeals filed by the insurance company and the petitioner. 15. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 16. The point that would arise for consideration are regarding the liability, and quantum of compensation. Reg.Liability: 17. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident and the petitioner having sustained injuries in the road traffic accident. The petitioner to prove that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent riding of the rider of the motorcycle, and the driver of the jeep produced a charge sheet - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 marked as Ex.P5. The rider and driver have equally contributed to the cause of accident. The tribunal, considering the entire evidence on record, has rightly apportioned the liability at the ratio of 50:50. I do not find any error in the judgment of the tribunal, regarding the apportionment of the liability. In view of the same, the point on liability is answered accordingly. Insofar as the quantum of compensation: 18. The petitioner contended that he was doing a business and used to earn Rs.3,300/- p.m. To substantiate his case, he has not produced any proof of income. In the absence of proof of income, the tribunal should have taken the notional income as per schedule II of the Motor Vehicle Act. As per the schedule the income has to be assessed at Rs.40,000/- per annum. The petitioner is aged 45 years old as of the date of accident and multiplier applicable to his age group is ‘13’ as per schedule II. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 The petitioner in order to prove the disability examined a doctor as PW.2, who is a treated doctor who has deposed that the petitioner has suffered 25% to the left lower limb and 25% to left upper limb, wherein he opined that the petitioner has suffered 50% disability to the whole body, whereas the tribunal has assessed the functional disability at 16% which is on the lower side. 19. Admittedly, PW.2 is a treated doctor. Considering the evidence of PW.2 and medical records, this court reassessed the disability at 40%. Thus, petitioners in all entitle for total compensation of Rs.2,18,000/- (Rs.40,000 X 13X 40%) + medical expenses of Rs.10,000/-. Thus, the petitioner is entitle to total compensation of Rs.2,18,000/- as against Rs.2,10,000/-. The petitioner is entitle to enhanced compensation of Rs.8,000/-. In view of the same, the point on quantum is answered accordingly. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 20. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER i. MFA Nos.100922/2015 and 103239/2015 are dismissed. ii. MFA No.100324/2016 is allowed in part. iii. The impugned judgment and award passed by the tribunal is modified. iv. The petitioner is entitled to total compensation of Rs.2,18,000/- as against Rs.2,08,000/- awarded by the tribunal. v. The petitioner is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.8,000/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the petition till realization. - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13403 MFA No. 100324 of 2016 C/W MFA No. 100922 of 2015 MFA No. 103239 of 2015 vi. Insofar as apportionment is concerned, the judgment and award passed by the tribunal is maintained. vii. Respondent Nos.2 and 4 are directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest within 8 weeks from the date of a receipt of copy of this judgment. viii. Registry is directed to transfer the amount in deposit, and TCRs to the tribunal forthwith. . Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE KMV upto para 2 SKS CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19