- 1 - MFA No.103998 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF JANUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.103998 OF 2016 (MV) BETWEEN: PRAVEEN S/O AYYAPPA KALLUR, AGE: 19 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: NEAR SHIRUR AGASI, BAGALKOT, DIST: BAGALKOT-587101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHIVANAND B. BEDSUR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ANAND R. KOLLI, ADVOCATE) AND: THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NWKRTC, BAGLAKOT-587101. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT. NIRMALA DODDAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.B. KANAVI, ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988, PRAYING TO CALL ON RECORDS AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY THE HON’BLE MEMBER M.A.C.T-IV, BAGALKOT IN MVC NO.458/2012 DATED 07.05.2016 BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL. THIS MFA HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 08.01.2026 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench Date: 2026.01.27 16:48:11 +0530 - 2 - MFA No.103998 of 2016 CAV JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed to set aside the judgment and award dated 07.05.2016, passed in M.V.C No.458/2012 on the file of the Member Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-IV, Bagalkot (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for short) to allow this appeal by enhancing the compensation. 2. The facts leading to the filing of this appeal are as follows: The claimant filed a petition through his guardian under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short ‘MV Act’) against the respondents towards the grievous injuries sustained by the claimant. On 10.04.2012 at about 11:00 a.m., the claimant-Praveen was standing along with his friend with his bicycle, at that time, a NWKRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-29/F-928, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, and dashed to the petitioner. As a result, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized. Hence, claimant filed claim - 3 - MFA No.103998 of 2016 petition under Section 166 of the M.V.Act seeking compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. 3. On service of notice, the respondent-NWKRTC appeared through counsel and filed written statement in which the averments made in petition were denied. It is contended that the respondent-NWKRTC entrusted the bus to a driver who is holding valid and effective driving licence issued by the concerned government authority. The accident was not occurred due to the fault of the driver and the petitioner was not sustained injuries as shown in column No.11 of the petition. The accident occurred on the fault of the petitioner himself. The compensation claimed is highly exorbitant, disproportionate and without any basis. The injuries sustained by the petitioner will not cause any permanent disability. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the petition. 4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed issues and recorded the evidence. The mother of the claimant was examined as PW-1 and marked - 4 - MFA No.103998 of 2016 documents at Ex.P1 to Ex.P10. On behalf of the respondent, its conductor-cum-driver was examined as RW-1 and got marked authority letter as per Ex.R1. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgment and award, inter alia held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle (bus), as a result of which the claimant suffered grievous injuries. Further, it was also held that claimant was entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,68,590/-, with interest 9% p.a., and directed that the respondent is liable to pay the compensation amount. 5. The Tribunal has awarded compensation under different heads as under: Sl.No. Particulars Rs. 1 Loss of future earning on account of permanent disability 54,000 2 Medical expenses 74,490 3 Conveyance, nourishment foods and attendant’s charges 5,100 4 Pain and suffering 25,000 5 Loss of amenities 10,000 Total 1,68,590 - 5 - MFA No.103998 of 2016 6. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant suffered grievous injuries and was admitted to Dr.Katti Hospital, Bagalkot, where he underwent surgeries. He has already spent about Rs.1,50,000/- towards medical treatment and will require nearly Rs.50,000/- for future medical expenses. The injuries include fracture of the right temporal bone with temporo- parietal EDH, SAH, and diffuse brain injury, resulting in permanent physical disability of about 10% to the whole body. Despite the seriousness of the injuries, pain, suffering, medical expenses, loss of amenities, and loss of income during treatment, the Tribunal has awarded very meager compensation under all these heads, which is unjust and requires reconsideration. 7. He further submitted that the appellant is only 16 years old and was a student at the time of the accident. Due to the injuries, he is unable to continue his studies properly and his future earning capacity has been seriously affected. Though his income was assessed at Rs.2,500/- per - 6 - MFA No.103998 of 2016 month, the Tribunal failed to consider future increase in income as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of SARLA VERMA AND OTHERS VS DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER [2009 ACJ 1298]. If the impugned award is not modified, the appellant will suffer irreparable loss. Hence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal deserves to be enhanced in the interest of justice. 8. In support of his contentions, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Limited and Another reported in (2014) 14 SCC 396, wherein, the Apex Court laid down a broad guideline for just compensation in cases involving non-earning persons or minors who suffer permanent disability, as observed under: “12. Though it is difficult to have an accurate assessment of the compensation in the case of children suffering disability on account of a motor vehicle accident, having regard to the relevant factors, precedents and the approach of various High Courts, we are of the view that the appropriate compensation on all other heads in addition to the actual expenditure for treatment, - 7 - MFA No.103998 of 2016 attendant, etc. should be, if the disability is above 10% and up to 30% to the whole body, Rs 3 lakhs; up to 60%, Rs 4 lakhs; up to 90%, Rs 5 lakhs and above 90%, it should be Rs 6 lakhs. For permanent disability up to 10%, it should be Rs 1 lakh, unless there are exceptional circumstances to take a different yardstick. 9. Hence, the Apex Court held that in cases of minors or non-earning individuals suffering permanent disability in motor vehicle accidents, a just and reasonable compensation is to be awarded based on the percentage of disability, irrespective of proof of income or loss of future earnings. 10. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent- NWKRTC supports the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. He submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper, and do not call for any interference by this court. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 11. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant-claimant as well as respondent-NWKRTC. - 8 - MFA No.103998 of 2016 12. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Mallikarjun’s case (supra) it is observed that the appellant herein, is 16 years and also non-earning member prior to the accident. He has suffered Fracture right temporal bone with right tempo parietals EDH and SAH, diffuse brain edema. P.W.2-doctor had given his opinion that the claimant had permanent physical disability to an extent of 10%. Therefore, the claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- under the head loss of future earning on account of permanent disability. The compensation awarded under the other heads remains undisturbed in terms of the award of the Tribunal. Thus, the claimant is entitled to compensation as under: Sl.No. Particulars Rs. 1 Loss of future earning on account of permanent disability 1,00,000 2 Medical expenses 74,490 3 Conveyance, nourishment foods and attendant’s charges 5,100 4 Pain and suffering 25,000 5 Loss of amenities 10,000 Total 2,14,590 - 9 - MFA No.103998 of 2016 13. Accordingly, this court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i) Miscellaneous First Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.2,14,590/- along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a., from the date of petition till realization. iii) The respondent-NWKRTC is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. iv) To the aforesaid extent, the judgment of the Tribunal is modified. Sd/- (DR. K.MANMADHA RAO) JUDGE MBS,CT:VP