Karnataka High Court
Prashant S/O Ramanna @ Ramachandra ... vs The Divisional Controller on 8 October, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13649
MFA No. 20673 of 2013
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 20673 OF 2013 (MV-)
BETWEEN:
PRASHANT
S/O. RAMANNA @ RAMACHANDRA HALAPET,
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: BARBER,
PRESENTLY NIL, R/O. JAIN PETH,
KULKARNI GALLI, BAGALKOT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. D.V. PATTAR FOR SRI. ANAND R. KOLLI, ADVOCATES)
AND:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
NWKRTC, DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOT.
GIRIJA A. ...RESPONDENT
BYAHATTI (BY SRI. S.S. BADAWADAGI, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI
Location: HIGHCOURT
OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(3) OF MOTOR
DHARWAD
VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO CALL ON RECORDS MODIFY
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE MACT-II AT
BAGALKOT IN M.V.C. NO.275/2011 DATED 17.01.2013 AND
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL, IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13649
MFA No. 20673 of 2013
HC-KAR
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Sri.D.V.Pattar who represents Sri.Anand R.Kolli learned counsel on record for the appellant. No representation on respondent's side on call.
2. Challenge in this appeal is the order that is rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Bagalkot in MVC No.275/2011 dated 17.01.2013.
3. On the ground that he sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred in the year 2011 and became permanently disabled the petitioner filed a petition claiming compensation of ₹13,00,000/- in total. The tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum of ₹1,45,400/- as compensation. Projecting that he is entitled for a higher sum, present appeal is filed.
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13649 MFA No. 20673 of 2013 HC-KAR
4. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the accident occurred in the year 2011 and for the relevant period, the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as ₹6,000/- per month for settlement of claims. But the tribunal took the notional income of the appellant as ₹3,000/- per month only which is unjustifiable. Learned counsel also states that the appellant sustained two grievous injuries in the road traffic accident and as per the evidence of PW-2 and PW-3, disability in respect of whole body is 25% but the tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 8%. Learned counsel further submits that the compensation that is granted by the tribunal under all other heads is also on lower side.
5. The tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum of ₹12,000/- under the head pain and suffering, ₹82,000/- towards medical expenses, ₹46,000/- towards loss of future income and ₹5,400/- towards loss of -4- NC: 2025:KHC-D:13649 MFA No. 20673 of 2013 HC-KAR amenities, nutrition, diet and attending charges. The tribunal granted a sum of ₹1,45,400/- in total.
6. The version of the appellant as per his pleadings itself is that he was earning ₹4,500/- per month by the date of the accident. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to take the notional income of the appellant as ₹6,000/- per month as pleaded now. It is not in dispute that the appellant sustained a grievous injury at L4 and L5 level and another grievous injury at L1 and L2 level. Through the evidence of PW-2 and PW-3 the appellant succeeded in establishing the nature of treatment he took, the aspect of disability and the expenditure he incurred. The appellant also succeeded in establishing that he took treatment as inpatient for a period of 27 days. Therefore, considering the evidence produced, this Court is of the view that the compensation that is granted by the tribunal requires enhancement. Having considered the totality of the evidence produced, this Court is of the view that the compensation granted can be enhanced globally by ₹50,000/- so that the amount which -5- NC: 2025:KHC-D:13649 MFA No. 20673 of 2013 HC-KAR the appellant receives as compensation as a whole will be justifiable. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Bagalkot through orders in MVC No.275/2011 dated 17.01.2013 is enhanced by ₹50,000/-.
(iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit.
(iv) Respondent is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment.
-6-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:13649 MFA No. 20673 of 2013 HC-KAR
(v) On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount.
Sd/-
(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE RH CT-MCK List No.: 2 Sl No.: 31