- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010460882016 NC: 2026:KHC:42790 MFA No. 8023 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8023 OF 2016 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. MAHESHA S/O LATE NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT NO.31, HOSAHALLI TALAGHATTAPURA POST KANAKAPURA ROAD, BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ARUN K. S, ADVOCATE) AND: MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C., DOUBLE ROAD SHANTHI NAGAR, BENGALURU. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M. K. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.11.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.3710/14 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, PRINCIPAL MACT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010460882016 NC: 2026:KHC:42790 MFA No. 8023 of 2016 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT Learned counsel for the appellant is present. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents is absent. 3. This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 27.11.2015 passed in MVC No.3710/2014 on the file of the Member, Principal MACT, Bangalore, seeking enhancement of the compensation. 4. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience. 5. The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 12.04.2013 and filed petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-. The Tribunal - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010460882016 NC: 2026:KHC:42790 MFA No. 8023 of 2016 considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.1,80,115/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization. 6. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed and mainly contended that the Tribunal granted meagre compensation. The petitioner was aged 29 years and was working as a Mason and agriculturist, earning Rs.15,000/- per month. He was advised bed rest for more than 4 months. The petitioner’s vehicle was badly damaged in the accident and the estimated cost of the repairs is Rs.70,000/-, but the KSRTC/corporation has given Rs.25,000/- towards ex-gratia. Therefore, requested for enhancement of the compensation. 7. Though the petitioner stated that he was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, he has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2013, this Court finds that it is just and reasonable to take - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010460882016 NC: 2026:KHC:42790 MFA No. 8023 of 2016 his notional income as Rs.8,000/- per month, as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The petitioner was aged 29 years and the relevant multiplier is ‘17’. The petitioner has filed Ex.P.5- wound certificate, Ex.P.18-inpatient record, Ex.P.19-x-ray and other medical records and examined the doctors as PW.2 and PW.3. PW.2 brought the inpatient record of the petitioner and x-ray under Exs.P.18 and P.19. PW.3 is an assistant professor of orthopedics and he stated that the petitioner sustained the following injuries: "1. Fracture lateral condyle left tibia. 2. Fracture distal radius left." On clinical examination, PW.3 found the following difficulties: "a Difficulty to stand and weight bear on left leg (2) To sit cross legged (2) To squatting on floor (3) To climb up and down the staircase (2) To walk on the slope (2) - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010460882016 NC: 2026:KHC:42790 MFA No. 8023 of 2016 b Range of movements (ROM) of left knee joint=flexion and extention (0-125) 110 about 12% loss of ROM X 3=3.6 ROM of left ankle joint is normal." The doctor has assessed the disability at 10% to the whole body. It is also stated that on radiological examination there is fracture of lateral condyle of left tibia that shows malunion with osteo arthritrs changes and narrowing of joint in lateral compartment. The fracture of left radius shows union. In the cross-examination, PW.3 stated that he has not treated the petitioner, and he was treated conservatively. Considering the medical evidence on record, this Court finds it reasonable to take the disability as 10%. Accordingly, the loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.1,63,200/- (8,000x12x17x10%). The petitioner was admitted in the hospital for a period of 15 days. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalization, age, occupation and other relevant factors, the Tribunal has granted Rs.40,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities, - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010460882016 NC: 2026:KHC:42790 MFA No. 8023 of 2016 Rs.2,753/- towards medical expenses and Rs.28,000/- towards loss of income during the laid up period and the said amounts are confirmed. This Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.30,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. 8. Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below: Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1. Towards pain and suffering 40,000/- 2. Towards medical expenses 2,753/- 3. Towards loss of amenities 20,000/- 4. Towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 30,000/- 5. Towards loss of income during laid up period 28,000/- 6. Towards loss of future earning capacity 1,63,200/- Total 2,83,953/- - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010460882016 NC: 2026:KHC:42790 MFA No. 8023 of 2016 9. Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.2,83,953/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 10. The manner of the accident shows that on 12.04.2013 at about 1.30 p.m., the petitioner was riding his motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-05-TC-168 and when he reached near Shivasandra gate, NH-206, the driver of the KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-07-F-1583 came from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner’s vehicle. The charge sheet is filed against the driver of the bus. But the Tribunal observed that the petitioner has not produced the driving licence and sketch. Accordingly, the Tribunal fixed contributory negligence as 25% against the petitioner. The spot mahazar does not disclose the place of accident. As per the IMV report, the front right side bumper of the bus was damaged and front portion of the motor cycle was damaged. RW.1 stated that the petitioner came from right - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010460882016 NC: 2026:KHC:42790 MFA No. 8023 of 2016 side of the road and admitted that he had seen the bus at a distance of 20 metres. but he stated that the road was curved. The width of the road is 24 feet and there are 4-ft footpath on both sides. The petitioner stated that he was holding a driving licence and he had lost the same at the time of the accident and he could not produce it. 11. Learned counsel for the appellant stated that there was no divider on the road. The Tribunal arrived at the finding of contributory negligence not by considering the manner of accident but by considering the non- production of the driving licence and sketch. Therefore, the said reasoning of the Tribunal regarding fixing of contributory negligence is not on proper appreciation of the facts and finding to that effect is set aside. Therefore, the KSRTC is directed to deposit Rs.2,83,953/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. within one month from the date of the order. 12. In the result, the following order is passed: - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010460882016 NC: 2026:KHC:42790 MFA No. 8023 of 2016 ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 27.11.2015 passed in MVC No.3710/2014 on the file of the Member, Principal MACT, Bangalore, is modified. iii. Respondent/KSRTC is directed to deposit Rs.2,83,953/- with interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order. iv. On such deposit, petitioner/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. v. The contributory negligence fixed up by the Tribunal is set aside. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AMA/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56