- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3725/2018 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2692/2018 (MV-I) IN M.F.A. No.3725/2018: BETWEEN: SMT. B.M. SUREKHA W/O K.M. NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT: NO.180/23, 60 FEET ROAD J.C. NAGAR, KURUBARAHALLI BENGALURU. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAJU S, ADV., FOR SRI. K.P. BHUVAN, ADV.,) AND: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR B.M.T.C. KENGAL HANUMANTHAIAH ROAD SHANTHI NAGAR BENGALURU - 560027. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:18.01.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.561/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, RAMANAGARA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN M.F.A. NO.2692/2018: BETWEEN: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BMTC KENGAL HANUMANTHAIAH ROAD SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560027 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. F.S. DABALI, ADV.,) AND: SMT. B.M. SUREKHA W/O K.M. NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NO.180/23, 60 FEET ROAD J.C. NAGAR, KURUBARAHALLI BANGALORE-560086. ...RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAJU S, ADV., FOR SRI. K.P. BHUVAN, ADV.,) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:18.01.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.561/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, RAMANAGARA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.3,24,100/- WITH INTEREST AT 7% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT MFA No.3725/2018 is filed by the injured/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation, whereas MFA No.2692/2018 is filed by the appellant-Corporation challenging the saddling of liability on it. Both these appeals are arising out of the judgment and award dated 18.01.2018 passed in MVC.No.561/2014 by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT., Ramanagara, (for short, ‘Tribunal’). 2. Though these appeals are listed for orders, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Sri.K.P.Bhuvan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-injured submits that the Tribunal has committed grave error in assessing the income of the injured at Rs.5,000/- per month by ignoring the fact that - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 the injured-claimant used to conduct tuition classes and was also doing tailoring work and used to earn more than Rs.10,000/- per month. It is submitted that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the evidence of PW2 and other medical records, which has resulted in awarding meager compensation under all heads. It is further submitted that the Tribunal taking note of the fact that the charge sheet was filed against the driver of the bus, recorded a correct finding that the driver of the bus was negligent and caused the accident in question. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal filed by the appellant-claimant. 4. Per contra, Sri.F.S.Dabali, learned counsel for the appellant-Corporation, submits that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the fact that the rider of the motorcycle rode the same in a rash and negligent manner and without following the traffic rules, crossed the road, turned and caused the accident. Hence, the contributory negligence is required to be saddled on the rider of the motorcycle as well. It is submitted that the award of - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 compensation by the Tribunal, by assessing the income, is just and proper, and there is no scope to enhance the same. It is further submitted that the disability is required to be considered at 16% and not 16.68%, which has been considered by the Tribunal, as the same would be 1/3rd of the 48% of the disability assessed by the doctor. It is also submitted that the award of interest by the Tribunal at 7% is without any justifiable reason, thus, the same also needs to be interfered. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal filed by the appellant-Corporation. 5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing on both the sides and meticulously perused the material available on record. 6. The injured-claimant as well as the Corporation are not in dispute with regard to the fact that the accident occurred on 04.10.2014 and due to the said accident, the claimant sustained injuries and provided treatment in the hospital. The perusal of the oral evidence of PW1, PW2 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 and other medical records, indicate that the claimant- injured was provided treatment at Adarsh Multi-Speciality Hospital, Kengeri, Bengaluru, and she was an in-patient for a period of 5 days. The medical records indicate that the injured-claimant sustained fracture of right femur. In order to prove the disability, the claimant examined the doctor as PW2, who has assessed the disability at 48% to the particular limb. Considering the same, the Tribunal assessed the disability of the claimant-injured at 16.68%, I am of the considered view that the same does not call for any interference. 7. Insofar as the income of the claimant is concerned, though it is claimed that the injured-claimant was conducting tuition classes and also doing tailoring work, however, no evidence is placed on record to the said effect to prove the income. Thus, in the absence of any proof of income, the income of the injured-claimant is required to be re-assessed notionally and the same is re- assessed at Rs.8,500/- per month by placing reliance on - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 the notional income chart prepared by the KSLSA. The injured-claimant was aged about 41 years as on the date of accident, the appropriate multiplier would be 14, which has been rightly considered by the Tribunal. Hence, the injured-claimant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future earnings due to disability as under: Rs.8,500 X 12 X 14 X 16.68% = Rs.2,38,190.4/- and the same is rounded off to Rs.2,38,191/-. 8. Having re-assessed the income and taking note of the fact that the injured-claimant was in-patient for a period of 5 days and PW2 has deposed that in view of the insertion of implants the injured-claimant is facing difficulty in conducting routine activities, I am of the considered view that the compensation under all other heads is also required to be re-assessed appropriately. Hence, the injured-claimant would be entitled to compensation of Rs.20,000/- towards food, nourishment and attendant charges; Rs.25,500/- (Rs.8,500 x 3) - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 towards the loss of income during laid-up period; Rs.40,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment of life. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards the expenses towards treatment, hospitalization, medicines and miscellaneous expenses, future medical expenses and pain and suffering is unaltered. Thus, the injured-claimant would be entitled to modified compensation as under: Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.4,87,668/- as against Rs.3,24,089/- awarded by the Tribunal. HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Expenses towards treatment, hospitalization, medicines and miscellaneous expenses 93,977 Future medical expenses 30,000 Food, nourishment and attendant charges 20,000 Loss of income during laid up period 25,500 Loss of future earnings due to disability 2,38,191 Pain & suffering 40,000 Loss of amenities and enjoyment of life 40,000 Total 4,87,668 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 9. Insofar as the contention of the appellant- Corporation regarding the contributory negligence is concerned, it is to be noticed that immediately after the accident, FIR was registered, police investigated the crime and charge sheet came to be filed against the driver of the bus. The Corporation has failed to examine any independent witness to substantiate the fact that the rider of the motorcycle has contributed to the accident in question and it is also to be noticed that in the case on hand, the claimant was a pillion rider, hence, question of contributory negligence would not arise. 10. Insofar as the contention of the appellant- Corporation that the award of interest at the rate of 7% per annum is on the higher side is concerned, the Tribunal, without any justifiable reason, awarded interest at the rate of 7% per annum on the compensation amount, hence, I am of the considered view that interest at the rate of 6% per annum would be appropriate as per - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 the present prevailing rate of interest paid by the nationalized banks on fixed/term deposits. 11. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER a) Both the appeal are allowed in part. b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.4,87,668/- as against Rs.3,24,089/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The entire compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. d) The Corporation shall deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:16668 M.F.A. No.3725/2018 C/W M.F.A. No.2692/2018 period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. e) The entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant- claimant. f) Registry shall transmit the amount in deposit along with the records to the Tribunal forthwith. g) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3