The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16688 MFA No. 6283 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6283 OF 2021 (MV-I) BETWEEN: …APPELLANT BALARAJ G.C. S/O CHIKKANNA, NOW AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, CONTRACTOR & AGRICULTURIST, AT PRESENT NO WORK, R/AT HONNAMARADI VILLAGE, JAGALUR TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. (BY SRI. RAGHU R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MANJUNATHA KUMAR S/O HANUMANTHAPPAL, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, DRIVER OF KSRTC BUS NO. KA-40-F-1140, BADGE NO.13829, 6TH GHATAKA, KENDRIYA VIBHAGA, BENGALURU PERMANENT R/AT KURAHATTI VILLAGE, RONA TALUK, GADAG DISTRICT - 582 209. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, CHIKKABALLAPURA DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA - 562 101. 3. THE CHAIRMAN, KSRTC, INTERNAL SECURITY FUND, SARIGHE BHAVANA, SHANTHI NAGARA, K.H. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 027. 4. ELUMALAI.S
Legal Reasoning
S/O SRINIVASAN, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16688 MFA No. 6283 of 2021 DRIVER OF LORRY NO. TN-52-C-0732, R/A BATTAVADI STREET, SANIYASPATTI PALURU, PANNARU TALUK, CUDDALORE DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU STATE - 607 001. 5. DHANASEELAN.S S/O SUYAMBUDURAI, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OWNER OF LORRY NO. TN-52-C-0732, R/AT NO.31A, RATHNAVEL STREET, BHUVANAGI TALUK, GUDDALORE DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU STATE - 607 001. 6. THE LEGAL MANAGER SHRIRAM GEN INS CO. LTD., BELLI ANKALA MAIN ROAD, J.P. NAGARA, BENGALURU - 560 078. 7. NAVEENKUMAR.E S/O MARISWAMY, AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, DRIVER OF SH TRAVEL BUS NO. KA-01-D-5348, R/AT THALAKU VILLAGE, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 501. 8. RAGHAVENDRA, MAJOR, S/O RAJASHEKARA S.P., AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS, OWNER OF SH TRAVEL BUS NO. KA-01-D-5348, R/AT KALIDASA NAGARA, SIRA TOWN, TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 137. 9. THE LEGAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INS CO. LTD., 1ST FLOOR, M.M.K. COMPLEX, C.G. HOSPITAL ROAD, P.J. EXTENSION, - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16688 MFA No. 6283 of 2021 DAVANAGERE - 577 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. RAMYA N. HIRIYUR, ADVOCATE FOR R3 SRI. B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R6 SRI. A.M. VENKATESH, ADVOCATE FOR R9 V/O/D 8/12/22 NOTICE TO R1, R4, R5, R7 AND R8 IS D/W R2-THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, CHIKKABALLAPURA DIVISION-SD) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.09.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.301/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. ITINERARY MACT-V, COURT, JAGALUR, THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in M.V.C.No.301/2019 dated 30.09.2021 by the Senior Civil Judge & Additional MACT- V, Itinerary Court, Jagalur, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.35,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident. 2. It is the case of the claimant that on 13.07.2018 at about 2:30 a.m., when he was travelling in S.H. Travels bus from Donnehalli to Bengaluru as a passenger, respondent No.7 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16688 MFA No. 6283 of 2021 being the driver of the said S.H. travels has drove the same on Hiriyur-Tumkur NH-4 road, reached near Bhuvanahalli gate, respondent No.1 being the driver of the KSRTC bus has drove the same in a rash and negligent manner came from Hiriyur towards Sira and dashed against the lorry which was parked in the dark night without any signal and respondent No.1, without giving any signal, stopped the KSRTC bus and respondent No.7 being the driver of the S.H. travel hit the KSRTC bus on its back side. As a result, the claimant had sustained grievous injuries to his both legs and right side bimalleular fracture and left medical malleular fracture with lower 1/3rd fibular fracture predent and other grievous injuries all over the body. He had spent huge amounts towards the medical expenses. 3. When it comes to the liability, the Tribunal has held that the drivers of all the three vehicles have committed great negligent act and all the drivers are held responsible, mere non-filing of the charge sheet against KSRTC and lorry driver is not a good ground to discharge S.H. bus driver from his liability. Though learned advocate for the claimant had cross- examined PW.1 and RWs.1 to 3, but nothing has been helpful to their case. When the lorry, KSRTC bus and S.H. bus owners - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16688 MFA No. 6283 of 2021 have insured their vehicles with the insurance companies i.e., respondent Nos.3, 6 and 9, hence, all the insurance companies are held liable to pay the compensation due to the contributory negligence act of all the three drivers. 4. When it comes to the apportionment, the Tribunal had held that Insurance Company of the lorry i.e., respondent No.6 is liable to pay 50% compensation and held that respondent No.3 KSRTC bus insurance company and respondent No.9, S.H. bus insurance company is liable to pay 25% each compensation to the claimant. 5. When it comes to the compensation, the Tribunal had granted the compensation as per the table given below: SL. No. 1. 2. 3. 4. Heads Compensation Awarded Loss of future earnings : Rs. 2,80,800/- Pain and suffering : Rs. 20,000/- Facilities and travelling : Rs. 20,000/- Loss of income during laid up period 5. Food & nourishment 6. Attendant charges : Rs. : Rs. : Rs. 3,900/- 20,000/- 3,900/- 7. Medical expenses : Rs. 1,78,946/- Total Which is rounded : Rs. 5,27,546/- : Rs. 5,27,550/- - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:16688 MFA No. 6283 of 2021 6. Considering the grievous injuries that are sustained by the claimant, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.60,000/- towards pain and suffering. Towards food & nourishment, facilities and travelling and attendant charges, the Tribunal had granted an amount of Rs.20,000/-, an amount of Rs.20,000/- and an amount of Rs.3,900/- respectively and this Court is not interfering with the same. Coming to loss of income during the laid up period, as this accident had taken place in the year 2018, the notional income is taken at Rs.12,500/-. Hence, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.37,500/- (Rs.12,500x3) towards loss of income during the laid up period. The Tribunal had rightly granted an amount of Rs.1,78,946/- towards medical expenses and no interference is called for. Coming to the loss of future earnings, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.3,90,000/- (Rs.12,500x12x13x20/100). The Tribunal had not granted any amount under the head of loss of amenities. Hence, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities. 7. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala vs. M. Malathi and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:16688 MFA No. 6283 of 2021 Another1, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. 8. The claimant is therefore, entitled to the compensation under the following heads: SL. No. 1. Heads Compensation Awarded by Tribunal Compensation Awarded by this Court Loss of future earnings : Rs. 2,80,800/- 3,90,000/- 2. Pain and suffering : Rs. 20,000/- 60,000/- 3. 4. 5. 6. Facilities and travelling Loss of income during laid up period : Rs. 20,000/- 20,000/- : Rs. 3,900/- 37,500/- Food & nourishment : Rs. 20,000/- Attendant charges : Rs. 3,900/- 20,000/- 3,900/- 7. Medical expenses 8. 9. Loss of amenities Legal expenses : Rs. : Rs. : Rs. 1,78,946/- 1,78,946/- 0/- 0/- 30,000/- 10,000/- TOTAL : Rs. 5,27,546/- 7,50,346/- Enhancement : Rs. 2,22,800/- 9. Altogether, the claimant is entitled for compensation of an amount of Rs.7,50,346/-. 1 (2014) 11 SCC 178 - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:16688 MFA No. 6283 of 2021 10. Accordingly, the appeal of the claimant is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.5,27,550/- to Rs.7,50,346/-. i. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. ii. The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Tribunal. iii. The respondent Nos.3, 6 and 9 - Insurance Companies shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security. iv. No costs. v. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 2 Sl No.: 30