- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18234 MFA No. 2154 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2154 OF 2025 (MV-I) BETWEEN: NINGARAJU P S/O LATE PUTTABASAVASHETTY, AGED 51 YEARS, R/AT TAGARAPURA MOLE VILLAGE. KOLLEGALA TALUK, CHAMARAJANAGARA DISTRICT. &APPELLANT (BY SRI.RAGHU R., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PRAMOD R, ADV.,) AND: 1. ARUNKUMAR M S/O LATE MALLANNA, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/AT SHOP NO.813, 12TH CROSS, VINAYA MARG, SIDDHARTH LAYOUT, NEAR TERESIAN COLLEGE. MYSORE DISTRICT 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD, 2ND FLOOR, BHEEMA AND BROTHERS BUILDING, B.M.ROAD, Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18234 MFA No. 2154 of 2025 KSRTC BUS STAND OPPOSITE, MYSORE DISTRICT. &RESPONDENTS (SRI. MALLIKARJUNA REDDY N.A. ADVOCATE FOR SRI. LINGARAJ H.S, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 19.01.2026, NOTICE TO R1 D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.04.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO. 208/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND J.M.F.C. AND ADDITIONAL MACT, KOLLEGALA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 23.04.2024 passed in MVC No.208/2021 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Addl.MACT, Kollegala, for enhancing the compensation. 2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18234 MFA No. 2154 of 2025 Company. The ranks of the parties are retained as per Tribunal for the sake of convenience. 3. The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 27.07.2021 and filed petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.6,45,123/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the tribunal granted inadequate compensation and amount granted by the Tribunal on other heads are also on lower side and no amount is granted for future prospects. Thus, requested for enhancement of the compensation. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.13Insurance Company submitted that the Tribunal has already considered all the facts and awarded just and reasonable compensation, which needs no interference. 6. Heard the arguments of both the sides. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18234 MFA No. 2154 of 2025 7. As per the doctor evidence the petitioner is suffering from permanent disability of 55% and submits that the Tribunal has rightly considered the permanent disability as 25% to the whole body. It is further stated that the rider of the motor cycle was not wearing helmet and there is 15% contributory negligence, which is confirmed. The manner of the accident is that on 27.07.2021 the petitioner was riding his TVS moped bearing registration No.KA-10-S-9431 from his land to his house on the left side of the road, at that time, the rider of the Hero Passion Pro motorcycle bearing registration No.KA- 09-JA-2213 came from Muguru side in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed to the backside of the moped as a result he fell down and sustained injuries. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of SADATH ALI KHAN VS. NOOR AHMED SAYEED1, wherein it was held that: 27. Moreover, under Section 129(a), the offence of not wearing protective headgear attracts a fine of Rs.1,000/- or suspension of the driving license for three months. Given this relatively minor penalty, reducing the insurance claim amount by 10% to 15% due to the non- 1 MFA.No.3459/2021 dated 23.07.2024 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18234 MFA No. 2154 of 2025 wearing of protective headgear is unjust. The fine and suspension already address the non-compliance, making additional reductions in compensation disproportionate." 9. Admittedly charge sheet is filed against the rider of the Hero Passion Pro and more over he dashed to the TVS Moped from backside and it is further observed by the Tribunal that rider of the motor cycle was not holding driving license to ride the same at the time of accident. The accident occurred on 27.07.2021, it shows that as on the date of accident the rider is having valid driving license to ride the motorbike and the petitioner has produced the copy of the insurance policy of the offending motorbike and it is valid from 12.08.2020 to 11.08.2025, which shows that as on the date of the accident the insurance policy was in force. The judgment relied upon by the petitioner is not properly appreciated on the contributory negligence and it is set aside. Therefore, insurance company is liable to pay the entire compensation. 10. Though it is stated that the petitioner/injured was working as a driver and agriculturalist and was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, he has not filed any income proof. As he met with an accident in the year 2021, his notional income is to be taken at Rs.15,000/- per month, as per the chart - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18234 MFA No. 2154 of 2025 prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The petitioner/injured was aged 48 years and the applicable multiplier is '13'. 11. Ex.P6 is the Wound Certificate. The petitioner also examined Neuro Surgeon as CW-1, he diagnosed the petitioner and stated that: • Mild head injury with Post traumatic Right Temporoparietal contusions with Right Parietal Acute Subdural Hemorrhage. Treated conservatively at K.R. Hospital, Mysore. After his general condition stabilized he was discharged from the hospital on 31.07.2021. He was admitted for 5 days. He was advised to come to Neurosurgery OPD for follow up treatment. Accordingly, he has come for follow up treatment for several times. • He continues to complain Giddiness, Headache, Decreased memory, Emotional disturbances, generalized weakness and the OPD follow up treatment details are with patient. • Examined the patient on 04.09.2023 with complaints of Headache, Giddiness, and right side pain abdomen, difficulty in remembering and understanding the things and words said to him and poor memory, unable to go to work. He also state that earlier he was active but now due to poor memory he is unable to involve in all the activities of daily living. • On examination patient is having impairment of immediate and remote memory. • to assess his level of disability due to RTA shows global score of 9 shows moderate disability and his neurobehavioral disability assigned percentage in 45%. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18234 MFA No. 2154 of 2025 12. The doctor assessed the total disability as 55%. Therefore, this Court find it just and reasonable to take disability at 35%. He is entitled for future prospects, as per the judgment in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Abdul S/o Mehabood Jahasilda2. As he was aged 48 years, he is entitled for 25% future prospects. Accordingly, the loss of the future earning capacity comes to Rs.10,23,750/- (15,000+25%12x13x35%). The Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs.5,123/- towards medical expenses as per Ex.P9(1) to (4) and it is confirmed. The petitioner/injured was hospitalized for a period of 5 days. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalisation and other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities. The petitioner/injured might not have attended to his work for a period of four months. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to grant a sum of Rs.60,000/- (Rs.15,000x4) towards loss of income during the laid-up period and Rs.30,000/- towards food and 2 MFA.No.103807/2016 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18234 MFA No. 2154 of 2025 nourishment, attendant charges and conveyance charges, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the said amounts. 13. Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below: 14. Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.11,98,873/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 15. In the result, the following order is passed: Sl.Nos. Particulars Amount in Rs. 1. Towards pain and suffering 50,000 2. Towards medical expenses 5123 3. Towards loss of amenities 30,000 4. Towards food and nourishment, attendant charges and conveyance charges 30,000 5. Towards loss of income during laid up period 60,000 6. Towards loss of future earning capacity 10,23,750 Total 11,98,873 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18234 MFA No. 2154 of 2025 ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 23.04.2024 passed in MVC No.208/2021 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Addl.MACT, Kollegala, is modified. iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.11,98,873/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization. iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company has already deposited 85% of the compensation as per the direction of the Tribunal. Contributory negligence assessed by the Tribunal is set aside. Insurance company is directed to deposit balance amount. Therefore, respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the balance compensation along with the interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:18234 MFA No. 2154 of 2025 v. On such deposit, petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. vi. The petitioner is not entitled for interest for 232 days of delay as per order on I.A.No.1/2025 dated 19.01.2026. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AG, List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51