- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26905 MFA No. 3908 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3908 OF 2021 (MV-D) BETWEEN: DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER KSRTC, DAVANGERE DIVISION DAVANGERE AND NOW REPRESENTED BY KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER, BANGALORE. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. S.NIRMMALA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BHARATHI W/O LATE NAGARAJAPPA AGED 48 YEARS, AGARDALLI CAMP BHADRAVATHI TALUK - 577 245. 2. NETRA N W/O AMBAREESH D/O LATE NAGARAJAPPA AGED 36 YEARS, NO.103, VINAYAKA BEEDI GAJANURU, AGRAHARA GAJANURU, SHIMOGGA - 577 201. 3. CHANDRAMMA N W/O MANJUNATHA D/O LATE NAGARAJAPPA AGED 33 YEARS., Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26905 MFA No. 3908 of 2021 AGARALLI CAMP BHADRAVATHI TALUK - 577 245. 4. LAKSHMI KENCHAPA JADAR W/O KENCHAPPA JADAR D/O LATE NAGARJAPPA AGED 31 YEARS, NO.57, WARD -01 KAWALETTU HAVERI - 581 110. 5. ROOPA N D/O LATE NAGARAJAPPA AGED 28 YEARS AGARDALLI CAMP BHADRAVATHI TALUK - 577 245. 6. GOLLALAPPA M S/O YALLAPPA AGED 48 YEARS, DRIVER KSRTC, BADGE NO.644 CHITRADURGA DEPOT CHITRADURGA - 577 501. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. LAKSHMISHA B.S, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R5; VIDE ORDER DATED 12.01.2024, NOTICE TO R6 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.07.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO. 123/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC AND ADDITIONAL MACT-11, BHADRAVATHI, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS. 7,94,444/- WITH INTEREST AT 7 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF THE PETITION TILL DATE OF REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26905 MFA No. 3908 of 2021 ORAL JUDGMENT The KSRTC-Corporation has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and award in MVC.No.123/2019 dated 07.02.2020 by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and JMFC and Additional MACT-11 at Bhadravathi. 2. The factual aspect of the matter is that on 25.05.2018 at about 05.15 p.m., the deceased in this case Nagarajappa was returning from his Sound System Shop by walking on the left side of the road on NH-13. While he was in front of the house of one Subbaraj at Agaradalli Camp, Bhadravathi Taluk, the driver of the KSRTC bus bearing registration No.KA-17/F/1559, drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the deceased from the back side, due to which, the claimant fell down and sustained grievous injuries on his head, both hands and legs. Though, he was shifted to Nanjappa Hospital initially and thereafter to Mc.Gann Hospital, Shivamogga, however, he succumbed to the injuries on the same day at about 06.10 pm. Thereafter, FIR was registered against the driver of KSRTC bus and charge sheet was laid against him. Subsequently, the legal heirs of the deceased filed a claim petition before the Tribunal. On - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26905 MFA No. 3908 of 2021 assessment of oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition and granted compensation of Rs.7,94,444/- with 7% interest to the claimants. Being aggrieved by the same, the Corporation has filed this appeal. 3. Heard Smt. S.Nirmala, the learned counsel for the appellant-Corporation and Sri Lakshmisha B.S., learned counsel for the claimants. 4. Apart from urging several contentions, learned counsel for the appellant-Corporation primarily contended that, the Tribunal has wrongly concluded that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the KSRTC bus. Per contra, the deceased was walking on the tar road of NH-13 by conversing in his mobile phone. As such, the accident was caused by solely due to the negligence of the deceased. She relied on the mahazar drawn by the police at Ex.P3 and contented that since, the accident was caused very close to edge of the tar road, the Tribunal ought to have fixed negligence on the deceased also. Accordingly, she also contended that the Tribunal has wrongly awarded interest at - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26905 MFA No. 3908 of 2021 7% instead of 6%. On these grounds, she prays to allow this appeal. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/claimants by supporting the impugned judgment and award contended that after meticulously examining the entire evidence on record, the Tribunal has rightly held that due to rash and negligent driving of the KSRTC bus, the accident was caused and accordingly, fixed the liability on the KSRTC. Hence, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 6. I have given my anxious consideration both on the submission by the respective parties and also perused the documents and evidence available on record. 7. It could be gathered from the records that the accident in question and coverage of the insurance policy of the offending vehicle are not in dispute. 8. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant-Corporation is that the accident has occurred due to the negligence of the deceased, since he was walking on the National Highway. The contention of the learned counsel cannot - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26905 MFA No. 3908 of 2021 be considered for the reason that on careful examination of the spot mahazar at Ex.P3, the same depicts that the accident was occurred one feet away from the tar road i.e., the National Highway. The tar road was 33 feet width and there is 5½ feet footpath on both side of the road. The accident was caused on the footpath where the deceased was walking. In such circumstances, it could be gathered that the driver of the KSRTC bus drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the deceased from backside. 9. In such circumstances, I am of the considered view that the Tribunal has rightly held that the driver of the bus was responsible for the accident. The respondents/claimants have not filed any appeal against the compensation. Even otherwise, the appellant’s counsel has not seriously argued on the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 10. In respect of the quantum of compensation is concerned, in view of the above discussion, since the driver of the KSRTC bus is solely responsible for the accident, the Tribunal after considering the income, age and other aspect of the matter, has rightly awarded the compensation. The - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26905 MFA No. 3908 of 2021 contention of the learned counsel for the appellant in respect of the interest is concerned, the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 7% pa., and the same needs to be modified from 7% into 6% p.a., as per judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in MFA.No.5896/2018 c/w MFA.Nos.4444/2018 & 4659/2018. Hence, interest awarded by the Tribunal at 7% is reduced to 6% p.a. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. In view of disposal of the main appeal, I.As., if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE PB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50