- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2261 OF 2020(MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2395 OF 2020(MV-I) IN MFA No. 2261/2020 BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, GIRISH COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, AGRAHARA STREET, CHAMARAJANAGARA. POLICY ISSUING OFFICE AT NO.6, 7TH MAIN, FOOD WORLD, 80 FEET ROAD, 3RD BLOCK, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560 034. REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER, RO, NO.44/45, IV FLOOR, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX, RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS, (ALSO KNOWN AS FM CARIAPPA ROAD CROSS), M G ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 025. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GUNASHEKAR R., ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 AND: 1. SRI. DHANANJAIAH, S/O SRI. HONNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, R/O BASAPPANADODDI VILLAGE, KOLLEGALA TALUK, CHAMRAJANAGAR DISTRICT - 577 598. 2. SRI. SHIVANNA M, S/O SRI. MADAIAH, MAJOR, R/O NO.8-1, YEDAPURA VILLAGE, CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT - 571 313. (OWNER OF TVS XL MOPED BEARING NO.KA-10-L-5365). 3. SMT. NAGAMMA, MAJOR, W/O SRI. MAHADEVANAIKA, R/O NO.725, UMMATHURU, CHAMARAJANAGAR TALUK, CHAMARAJANAGAR DISTRICT - 571 316. (OWNER OF PIAGGIO APE PASSENGER AUTO BEARING NO.KA-10-5022). 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER, CHOLAMANDALAM M.S.GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.271, ASHRAYA BUILDING, LAKSHMI VILAS ROAD, DEVARAJA MOHALLA, MYSORE - 570 001. (INSURER OF PIAGGIO APE PASSENGER AUTO - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 BEARING NO.KA-10-5022) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M.KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R4; NOTICE TO R1 AND R3 ARE SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.10.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.25/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHAMARAJANAGAR, (SITTING AT KOLLEGAL), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.3,10,423/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALIZATION. IN MFA NO. 2395/2020 BETWEEN: 1. DHANANJAIAH S/O HONNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, BASAPPANADODDI VILLAGE, KOLLEGALA TQ, CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT - 571 441. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. SREENIVASAN M Y., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHIVANNA M S/O MADAIAH, MAJOR, R/AT NO.8-1, YEDAPURA VILLAGE, CHAMARAJANAGAR TQ AND DISTRICT - 571 441. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., GIRISH COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, AGRAHARA STREET, CHAMARAJANAGARA - 571 313. 3. NAGAMMA W/O MAHADEVANAIKA, MAJOR, R/AT 725, UMMATHURU, CHAMARAJANAGAR TQ AND DISTRICT - 571 441. 4. BRANCH MANAGER, CHOLAMANDALAM M S GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.271, ASHARAYA BUILDING, LAKSHMIVILAS ROAD, DEVARAJA MOHALLA, MYSORE - 570 007. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.GUNASHEKAR R., ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI.M.KRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R4; NOTICE TO R3 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.10.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.25/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, CHAMARAJANAGAR, MACT, (SITTING AT KOLLEGALA), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT These two appeals arising out of the judgment and award passed in MVC.No.25/2012 dated 17.10.2019 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge at Chamrajanagar [Sitting at Kollegala] and M.A.C.T., whereby the Tribunal, partly allowed the claim petition filed by the claimant and awarded a compensation of Rs.3,10,423/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. 2. The brief facts which are necessary to file these appeals are that on 20.10.2011 at about 3:30 p.m., the claimant i.e., appellant in MFA.No.2395/2020 was proceeding along with his friends and they were traveling in a Peioggio Appe passenger auto bearing Reg.No.KA-10-5022 from Jannur to Hosur village, at that time when they reached the place called Heggavadi village, Chamarajanagar Taluk, the rider of the TVS XL Moped bearing Reg.No.KA-10-L-5365, rode the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the auto rickshaw in which the claimant was traveling. As a result, the auto turtled and the claimant sustained injuries. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 Thereafter, he was shifted to the hospital and treated as inpatient. Subsequently, he filed claim petition claiming compensation for the accidental injuries sustained. 3. The Tribunal, on assessment of oral and documentary evidence on record, partly allowed the claim petition as stated supra. Aggrieved by which, the claimant preferred MFA.No.2395/2020, seeking enhancement of compensation, whereas the insurance company preferred MFA.No.2261/2020 against saddling of liability on the insurer as well as against quantum of compensation. 4. Heard the learned counsels for the respective parties. 5. Learned counsel for the insurer apart from urging several contentions, primarily contended that the Tribunal has grossly erred while saddling entire negligence on the part of rider of the TVS XL Moped. According to him, the driver of the auto rickshaw equally contributed negligence for occurrence of the accident. Further, notwithstanding the said contention, learned counsel contended that the insurance company is not - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 liable to make good the compensation for the claimant since the rider of the TVS XL Moped was not possessing valid driving licence at the time of accident. He further contended that TVS XL Moped was though covered by insurance policy, the said policy had limited liability of third party. As such, the said liability cannot be extended to the claimant who was a passenger in auto rickshaw. Further, he also contended that the claimant failed to examine eye-witness before the Tribunal. Further, he contended that the Tribunal was not justified in awarding exorbitant compensation to the claimant without properly considering the avocation, age and other aspects of the matter. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal filed by the insurance company by dismissing the appeal filed by the claimant. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimant contended that though Tribunal was justified in saddling entire negligence on the part of rider of TVS XL Moped and also saddling liability on the insurance company to pay the compensation, the Tribunal was not justified in awarding just compensation to the claimant. He further contended that the - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 Tribunal has not properly awarded compensation on the heads of 'pain and sufferings', 'Conveyance, Food and Nourishment' and 'loss of future income' and on the other heads. Accordingly, he prays for enhancement of compensation by allowing the appeal filed by the claimant and by dismissing the appeal filed by the insurance company. 7. Learned counsel for the insured/owner of the TVS XL Moped vehicle supported the impugned award passed by the Tribunal. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by both the learned counsel for the parties and so also perused the entire evidence on record. 9. As could be gathered from records, the accident in question and the coverage of the insurance policy for the offending TVS XL Moped are not seriously in dispute in the instant case. As regards the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the insurance company that the Tribunal was not justified in saddling entire liability on the rider of motorcycle i.e., TVS XL Moped, on careful examination/investigation of the - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 documents placed by the claimant before the Tribunal, it is seen that immediately after the accident, FIR came to be registered against rider of TVS XL Moped as per Ex.P1 and subsequently the jurisdictional police conducted an investigation and laid charge sheet against the rider of the motorcycle. Further, on examination of evidence of PW.1, his testimony corroborates to the investigation documents placed before the Tribunal. By considering those documents, the Tribunal has rightly held that the accident had caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the rider of the motorcycle. I find no good ground to interfere with the said findings of the Tribunal. 10. The other contention that the insurance policy covered to the motorcycle had a limited liability which covers only third parties and not the claimant, who was a passenger of the auto rickshaw, does not hold much water for the reason that the insurance company has not taken such contention before the Tribunal and not placed any such evidence or documents to that effect. As such, on the available evidence, - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 the Tribunal has dealt with the said aspect of the matter in Paragraph Nos.17 and 18 of the judgment and award. 11. Further, another contention of learned counsel for the insurance company that the insurance company is not liable to make good the payment since the driver of the motorcycle was not possessing valid driving licence, also cannot be considered for the reason that the rider of TVS XL Moped was possessing valid driving licence. In such circumstances, the Tribunal by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kamala Mangalal Vayani vs. United India Insurance Company Limited reported in 2011(2) TAC 390 SC, has rightly held that the insurance company is liable to pay compensation. 12. Coming to the aspect of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, since the accident was of the year 2011, the Tribunal was justified in taking the notional income of the injured-claimant at Rs.6,500/- per month. The Tribunal, upon appreciation of evidence of the Doctor-PW.2, has rightly assessed the disability suffered by the claimant at 15% and has - 11 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 rightly adopted the multiplier at '18'. Thus, the Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation of Rs.2,10,600/- on the head of 'loss of future income'. 13. The compensation granted under other heads are concerned, i.e., considering nature and gravity of injuries sustained by the claimant and also the length of his hospitalization, I am of the considered view that a sum of Rs.50,000/- could be awarded under the head 'pain and sufferings and mental agony' as against Rs.25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 14. Since the claimant was hospitalized for a period of 24 days, three months could be considered as a laid up period. Accordingly, the claimant would be entitled for 'loss of income during laid up period' at Rs.19,500/- (6500x3) as against Rs.39,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 15. The Tribunal has not awarded any sum towards 'loss of amenities'. Considering long lasting effect of the injuries sustained by the claimant, I deem it just and appropriate to award a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards 'loss of amenities'. - 12 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 Towards Food, Conveyance, Nourishment and etc., the Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs.30,000/-. The Tribunal was also justified in awarding Rs.5,823/- towards hospitalization and medical expenses, since the same was based on documentary evidence. 16. Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified and the claimant would be entitled to the following compensation: Sl. No. Compensation under different Heads As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) As awarded by this Court (Rs.) 1. Pain and sufferings and mental agony 25,000/- 50,000/- 2. Loss of future income 2,10,600/- 2,10,600/- 3. Medical expenses 5,823/- 5,823/- 5. Loss of income during the laid up period 39,000/- 19,500/- 6. Conveyance, food, nourishment, attendant charges 30,000/- 30,000/- 7. Loss of amenities in life - 30,000/- - 13 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010071122020 NC: 2026:KHC:40156 MFA No. 2261 of 2020 C/W MFA No. 2395 of 2020 Total 3,10,423/- 3,45,923/- 17. Thus, upon re-assessment of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant is entitled to the total compensation of Rs.3,45,923/- as against Rs.3,10,423/-, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. 18. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation, if not already deposited, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. 19. The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement in terms of the award. These appeals are accordingly allowed in part. Sd/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE