- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32448 MFA No. 2765 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2765 OF 2023 (MV-D) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. THOLASAMMA W/O LATE. NARASIMAHAIAH, NOW AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, 2. DEVARAJU G.N., S/O LATE. NARASIMAHAIAH, NOW AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, 3. PURUSHOTHAM S/O LATE. NARASIMAHAIAH, NOW AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, 4. LAKSHIMIDEVI W/O CHIKKANNA NOW AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, 5. LAKSHMAMMA W/O LATE. CHIKKANARASIMAHAIAH NOW AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, ALL ARE RESIDING AT GIRIJAPURA, MOTAGONDANAHALLI POST,L SOLUR HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK, RAMANAGARAM DISTRICT …APPELLANTS (BY SRI. RANGEGOWDA N.R., ADVOCATE) AND: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC CENTRAL DIVISION Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32448 MFA No. 2765 of 2023 K.H. ROAD, SHANTINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. DABALI FAKKIRAPPA SHIDRAMAPPA, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 20.12.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.4112/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, (SCCH-24), C/C. XXII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATI ON AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC.No.4112/2020 dated 20.12.2022 by the XXII Additional Small Causes Judge, Member - MACT, Bengaluru, whereby the Tribunal had fixed contributed negligence at 20% on the part of the deceased granted compensation of an amount of Rs.10,85,800/-, the claimants are before this Court. 2. The facts of the case are that on 23.10.2020 at about 6:00 p.m., the deceased was waiting for crossing the road on the left side of the road on NH-75, Nelamangala Taluk, Bangalore Rural District, at that time, the driver of the KSRTC bus came rashly, recklessly and negligently with high speed - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32448 MFA No. 2765 of 2023 and dashed against the deceased and caused the accident. As a result, the deceased sustained severe injury and died at the spot. 3. The Tribunal had observed that the total compensation comes to an amount of Rs.13,88,472/- and 20% negligence on the part of the deceased needs to be deducted and the remaining 80% compensation comes to an amount of Rs.11,10,778/- (Rs.13,88,472/- - Rs.2,77,694/-) and if it is rounded off then it comes to an amount of Rs.11,10,800/-. As the respondent had paid an amount of Rs.25,000/- as interim compensation to the claimants, the claimants are entitled for compensation of an amount of Rs.10,85,800/- (Rs.10,85,800/- - Rs.25,000/-). 4. Learned counsel appearing for the claimants submits that the Tribunal ought not to have fixed the contributory negligence at 20% on the deceased. It is submitted that the respondent/KSRTC had failed to examine the driver of the vehicle and when there is no evidence with regard to the contributory negligence on behalf of the respondent/KSRTC, the Tribunal ought not to have fixed contributory negligence at - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32448 MFA No. 2765 of 2023 20% on the part of the claimant. It is submitted that without any basis, the Tribunal had held that there is 20% contributory negligence on the part of the deceased. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/KSRTC submits that the Tribunal had examined the sketch and when the deceased was crossing the highway where there is no zebra crossing and at 6 o'clock in the evening, in fact the contributory negligence that is fixed on the part of the deceased is on the lower side and it should have been 50%. 6. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. As rightly argued by the learned counsel for the appellants, the respondent/KSRTC had not examined the driver of the vehicle, but they had examined the conductor. The evidence of the other witnesses shows that there is negligence on the part of the driver of the KSRTC bus. But however, the sketch reveals that the deceased was crossing the highway and the Tribunal had held that there is contributory negligence of 20%. No doubt there is contributory negligence, however, this Court is inclined to reduce the same - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32448 MFA No. 2765 of 2023 to 10%. Accordingly, the contributory negligence that is fixed on the claimant is reduced from 20% to 10%. 7. The compensation that is awarded is an amount of Rs.13,88,472/- and 10% comes to an amount of Rs.1,38,847/- and he is entitled for an amount of Rs.12,49,625/- (Rs.13,88,472 - Rs.1,38,847/-). As the respondent/KSRTC had already paid an amount of Rs.25,000/- as interim compensation, the claimants are entitled for an amount of Rs.12,24,625/- (Rs.12,49,625/- - Rs.25,000/-). 8. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala vs. M. Malathi and Another1, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. Altogether, the claimants are entitled for an amount of Rs.12,34,625/-. 9. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimants is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.10,85,800/- to Rs.12,34,625/-. 1 (2014) 11 SCC 178 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32448 MFA No. 2765 of 2023 i. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. ii. The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Tribunal. iii. The respondent/KSRTC shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security. iv. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. v. No costs. vi. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29