- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6507 MFA No. 167 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 167 OF 2023 (MV-I) BETWEEN: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR K.S.R.T.C TRANSPORT BHAVAN SHANTINAGAR, K.H.ROAD BENGALURU, 560027. REP BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. R S BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. G LAKSHMEESH RAO,ADVOCATE) AND: SRI. CHIKKAHUCHCHAIAH S/O LATE PILLE MARIYAIAH AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, R/O CHURCH ROAD, SHETTAHALLI CHANNAPATNA TOWN RAMANAGARA DISTRICT 562159. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAJU S, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.10.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.38/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, JMFC, CHANNAPATNA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.5,30,424/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT. Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6507 MFA No. 167 of 2023 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard. Sri. R.S.Bhatt, who represents Sri.G. Lakshmeesha Rao, learned counsel on record for the appellant as well as Sri. Raju S. learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal is the outcome of the award that is passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Channapatna in MVC No.38/2016 dated 25.10.2021. Appellant against whom liability is fixed to compensate the claimant is before this Court raising two pertinent grounds. Firstly, that there is no negligence on the part of its driver and entire negligence lies on the part of the claimant only. Secondly, the compensation granted is exorbitant. 3. Arguing on first point, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the claimant wanted to climb the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6507 MFA No. 167 of 2023 bus when the bus was still in motion and thereby he fell down and sustained injuries. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimant contends that the driver of the appellant drove the bus in a rash and negligent manner due to which claimant fell down from the bus and the front wheel of the bus ran over the left foot of the claimant and thereby the claimant sustained injuries. 5. It is not in dispute that police registered a case against the driver of the bus only and laid charge sheet against him, duly making mention that due to his negligence, the accident occurred. No convincing material is produced by appellant to establish his version about the negligence on part of the claimant. Therefore, this Court is of the view that there are no grounds to interfere with the findings given by the Tribunal that the accident occurred due to negligence on the part of the driver of appellant. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6507 MFA No. 167 of 2023 6. Coming to quantum, the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant are twofold. Primarily that the claimant is not entitled for any compensation towards loss of future earnings and secondly, that the amount granted as compensation towards medical expenditure is excessive. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the claimant was working as traffic controller at appellant's organization itself and after the accident also, claimant attended his duties and retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation and thus, there is no loss of earnings. Learned counsel for the claimants accept the submission thus made but states that the claimant attended his work with great difficulty due to disability and hence, he is entitled for loss of amenities in life. 8. So far as medical expenditure is concerned, learned counsel for the claimant raised no objection on the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant that a sum of ₹ 50,000/- is granted in excess. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6507 MFA No. 167 of 2023 9. By all the evidence produced, claimant succeeded in establishing that he sustained type 2A open fracture proximal Phalynx 1st and 4th toes and fracture of 3rd metatarsal bone of left foot. As per the evidence of PW2, left great toe has been amputated and there is malunion of 3rd metatarsal and 4th Promixam Phalnx. Though, the claimant is not entitled for compensation under the head 'loss of future earnings' in Stricto sensu, yet having considered the nature of injuries sustained and the disability, this Court is of the view that the claimant is entitled to considerable amount towards loss of amenities in life. 10. As earlier indicated, compensation granted towards medical expenditure is excessive by ₹50,000/-. No sum is awarded as compensation towards loss of amenities in life. Also, compensation granted under the heads pain and suffering and towards attendant, food and nourishment charges is on the lower side. That apart, the Tribunal failed to award any compensation for the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:6507 MFA No. 167 of 2023 expenditure for which the claimant would have incurred for transportation. Hence, considering all these aspects, this Court is of the view that the compensation granted by the Tribunal if reduced by ₹ 1,00,000/-, the remaining amount which the claimant receives will be justified. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) Appeal is allowed in part. (ii)The compensation that is granted by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Channapatna, through orders in MVC No.38/2016 dated 25.10.2021 is reduced by ₹1,00,000/-. (iii)Amount if any, in deposit is transmitted to the concerned Tribunal immediately. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE SSD List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20