- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14001 MFA No. 8855 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8855 OF 2012 (MV) BETWEEN: KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION CHAMRAJANAGAR DEPOT BY ITS DEPOT MANAGER REP BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER …APPELLANT (BY SMT. H R RENUKA, ADVOCATE) AND: HULAGANAIKA @ KULAGANAIKA S/O MADANAIKA AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/O YANAGALLI VILLAGE CHAMARAJNAGAR TALUK 571313 …RESPONDENT (V/O DTD 03/11/15 NOTICE TO RESPONDENT THROUGH PAPER PUBLICATION IS ACCEPTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 2.5.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.381/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, CHAMARAJANAGAR, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.1,46,980/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A PENDETE-LITE AND FUTURE INTEREST TILL THE DATE OF REALIZATION OF AWARD AMOUNT. Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14001 MFA No. 8855 of 2012 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal is filed by the Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation1 calling in question the judgment and award dated 02.05.2012 in MVC No.381/20102 passed by the District Judge and Member, MACT, Chamarajanagar3, whereunder the Tribunal had awarded a total compensation of `1,46,980/-. It is contended that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is excessive. 2. It is forthcoming that the claimant was aged 30 years as on date of the accident, i.e., as on 23.07.2009 and was a coolie. The claimant sustained diffused swelling of right wrist; sutured wound on front of right knee; tenderness of left thigh; tenderness in the back of left shoulder; tenderness in the right cheek; fracture of radius bone. The Tribunal has awarded `48,000/- towards pain and suffering and `10,580/- towards medical and other incidental expenses. 1 hereinafter referred to as the 'KSRTC' 2 hereinafter referred to as the 'impugned judgment' 3 hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal' - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14001 MFA No. 8855 of 2012 3. The Tribunal has also noticed that the doctor (CW.1) has assessed the disability of the claimant at 30% to the particular limb. Hence, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of `75,000/- towards the disability and a sum of `15,000/- towards loss of amenities. 4. It is forthcoming that although certain aspects of the compensation awarded are contended as being excessive, it is forthcoming that the Tribunal has not awarded compensation on various other heads of compensation such as, loss of income during laid-up period, etc. 5. In view of the aforementioned, the above appeal is dismissed as devoid of merit. 6. The amount deposited by the appellant in the above appeal be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement in terms of the award of the Tribunal. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE BS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 0