Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Karnataka · body

2026 DAILYLAW 36472 (KAR)

GIREESHA D v. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR

MFA/5359/2021 · 2026-08-19

Rajesh Rai K

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010074582021 NC: 2026:KHC:45055 MFA No. 5359 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5359 OF 2021(MV-I) BETWEEN: GIREESHA D S/O DEVARAJACHAR, AGD ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDIG AT DODAKAVALANDE HOBLI, DODDAHOMMA, NANJANAGUDU TALUK 571 301. MYSURU. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHANTHARAJ K.,ADVOCATE) AND: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC RURAL DIVISION, BANNAIMANTAP, MYSURU 570 015. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RADHA B P.,ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.25.02.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.490/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010074582021 NC: 2026:KHC:45055 MFA No. 5359 of 2021 JUDGE, MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The claimant, being dissatisfied with the compensation of Rs.2,77,621/- awarded by the Tribunal, is in appeal. 2. The fact that the accident occurred and the further fact that the offending vehicle belongs to KSRTC is not in dispute. 3. The Tribunal, on assessment of evidence, has awarded the following sums as compensation: Sl. No. Particulars Amount in (Rs.) 1. Pain and sufferings 50,000 2. Medical expenses 1,36,621 3. Food and nourishment 10,000 - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010074582021 NC: 2026:KHC:45055 MFA No. 5359 of 2021 4. Transportation charges 10,000 5. Loss of amenities in life 35,000 6. Attendant charges 7,500 7. Loss of income during laid up period 28,500 Total 2,77,621 4. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head of loss of future income on the ground that PW.2, the treated doctor, though examined before the Tribunal, had not assessed the disability, whereas PW.3, who assessed the disability, was not the treating doctor. However, on perusal of the evidence of PW.2, it is evident that he has stated that owing to incomplete treatment, he was unable to assess the disability, and therefore, PW.3 assessed the disability. On perusal of the evidence of PW.3, coupled with Ex.P18–disability certificate, wherein the disability has been assessed at 23.5%, having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, I am of the considered view that it would be appropriate to assess the disability at 10%. - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010074582021 NC: 2026:KHC:45055 MFA No. 5359 of 2021 5. Since there is no credible documentary evidence to ascertain the actual monthly income, it would be appropriate and prudent to adopt the monthly income determined by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, which, for the accident of the year 2019, would be Rs.14,000/-. 6. As the claimant was aged 28 years, the appropriate multiplier would be '17'. Consequently, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.2,85,600/- (14,000 x 12 x 17 x 10%) towards 'loss of future income'. 7. Having regard to the nature of injuries suffered by the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to Rs.42,000/- (14,000 X 3 months) towards 'loss of income during the laid up period' as against Rs.28,500/- awarded by the Tribunal. 8. Having regard to the injuries suffered by the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards 'pain and suffering' as against Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 9. Having regard to the length of the stay of the claimant in the hospital, the claimant would also be entitled to 'Food and - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010074582021 NC: 2026:KHC:45055 MFA No. 5359 of 2021 nourishment' at Rs.15,000/- as against the sum of Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 10. Having regard to the lasting effects of the injuries on the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of amenities, as against the sum of Rs.35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 11. Having regard to the injuries suffered by the claimant and for its future treatment, I deem it just and appropriate to award a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards 'future medical expenses'. 12. The sum awarded as medical expenses at Rs.1,36,621/- being based on the documentary evidence, do not call for modification and hence confirmed. 13. The sums awarded under other heads of compensation granted by the Tribunal, remains unaltered. 14. Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified and the claimant would be entitled to the following compensation: Sl. No. Compensation under As awarded by the As awarded by this - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010074582021 NC: 2026:KHC:45055 MFA No. 5359 of 2021 different Heads Tribunal (Rs.) Court (Rs.) 1. Pain and sufferings 50,000 60,000 2. Medical expenses 1,36,621 1,36,621 3. Food and nourishment 10,000 15,000 4. Transportation charges 10,000 10,000 5. Loss of amenities in life 35,000 40,000 6. Attendant charges 7,500 7,500 7. Loss of income during laid up period 28,500 42,000 8. Loss of future income --- 2,85,600 7. Future medical expenses --- 20,000 Total 2,77,621 6,16,721 15. Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total compensation of Rs.6,16,721/- as against Rs.2,77,621/-, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. 16. The respondent - KSRTC is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010074582021 NC: 2026:KHC:45055 MFA No. 5359 of 2021 17. The apportionment of compensation amount shall be in terms of the award of the Tribunal. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10