Karnataka High Court
Basavaraj Revansiddappa Goddemmi vs Managing Director on 9 March, 2026
Author: Ravi V.Hosmani
Bench: Ravi V.Hosmani
-1-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3697
MFA No. 101958 of 2015
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101958 OF 2015 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
MR. BASAVARAJ REVANSIDDAPPA GODDEMMI,
AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: SERVICE,
R/O: H.NO.MIG 12, GAMANAGATTI ROAD,
NAVANAGAR, HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI VISHWANATH L. HEGDE, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI HARSHWARDHANA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MANAGING DIRECTOR,
NWKSRTC, HUBLI DIVISION, HUBLI.
2. SELF INSURANCE FUND,
NWKSRTC, HUBLI DIVISION, HUBLI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI IC PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
CHANDRASHEKAR
LAXMAN
R2-SERVED)
KATTIMANI
Digitally signed by
CHANDRASHEKAR
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
LAXMAN KATTIMANI
Location: High Court of
Karnataka, Dharwad
Bench
VEHICLES ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
Date: 2026.03.10
09:29:55 +0000
DATED 07.03.2015, PASSED IN MVC.NO.341/2013, ON THE FILE
OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, AT HUBLI, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION & ETC.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V.HOSMANI
-2-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3697
MFA No. 101958 of 2015
HC-KAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
Challenging judgment and award dated 07.03.2015 passed by I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT, Hubli (for short, 'Tribunal') in MVC no.341/2013, this appeal was filed.
2. Sri Vishwanath L.Hegde, advocate appearing for Sri Harshawardhana M.Patil, learned counsel for appellant submitted that appeal was by claimant for enhancement of compensation. It was submitted that on 30.11.2012, claimant - Basavaraj was one of inmates of NWKRTC bus bearing no.KA-25/F-2606 proceeding from Hubli towards Bangalore. Near Haveri, driver drove it in rash and negligent manner, lost control and leading to bus toppling down. In said accident, claimant sustained grievous injuries and despite treatment sustained loss of earning capacity. Therefore, he filed claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against NWKRTC.
3. On contest, wherein claim petition was opposed on all grounds, Tribunal framed issues and recorded evidence. It was further submitted that since there were other claim petitions arising out of same accident, they were clubbed together. Claimants were examined as PWs1 to 5 and Exhibits P1 to P114 -3- NC: 2026:KHC-D:3697 MFA No. 101958 of 2015 HC-KAR were marked. Respondent examined driver as RW1, but did not mark any documents.
4. On consideration, Tribunal held accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of bus by its driver and claimants were entitled for compensation. However, it erroneously awarded meager amount as global compensation. Same was questioned.
5. It was firstly submitted, though claimant had not produced wound certificate, he had duly produced discharge summary/disability certificate issued by Shushrutha Multispeciality Hospital and Research Centre, Hubli. Same would contain particulars of injury sustained, treatment administered. Under such circumstances, Tribunal was not justified in awarding meager compensation of ₹20,000/- globally. It was submitted that treatment records indicated claimant had sustained grievous injuries. Discharge card and disability certificate marked as Exs.P105 and 106 respectively. It was submitted, Ex.P106 would indicate fracture of shaft of left humorous. Therefore, Tribunal ought to have assessed and awarded compensation under each of heads separately. On said ground sought for allowing appeal. -4-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3697 MFA No. 101958 of 2015 HC-KAR
6. On other hand, Sri IC Patil, learned counsel for respondent no.1 - NWKRTC opposed appeal.
7. Heard learned counsel and perused impugned judgment and award and copies of Exs.P105 and 106 made available by learned counsel for claimant.
8. From above and since only claimant is in appeal for enhancement of compensation, point that would arise for consideration is:
'Whether claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation as prayed for?'
9. At outset, it is seen that there is no dispute between parties about occurrence of accident involving NWKRTC bus in which claimant was travelling, on 30.11.2012. There is also no dispute about claimant sustaining injuries and taking treatment. To substantiate injury sustained in accident and consequent loss of earning capacity, claimant seeks to rely upon police investigation records and hospital records namely discharge summary and disability certificate.
-5-
NC: 2026:KHC-D:3697 MFA No. 101958 of 2015 HC-KAR
10. As noted above, Ex.P106 indicates claimant had sustained fracture of shaft of left humorous. Since same is a major and structural bone, Tribunal ought to have awarded compensation under each of heads separately. Taking note of fact that fracture is grievous and to a structural bone, compensation of ₹20,000/- awarded would appear inadequate and is enhanced to ₹35,000/-.
11. Though claimant stated that he was earning, there is no specific evidence with regard to same. Therefore, income of claimant has to be considered notionally. Accident occurred in 2012. Notional income for said year is ₹6,500/-. Normally fractures take about three months to heal. Considering same as period of layoff, claimant is awarded ₹19,500/- towards loss of income during laid up period. Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards medical expenses, diet and other incidental expenses. Considering duration of inpatient treatment i.e. 9 days, it is found appropriate to award ₹9,000/- under said head. Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of amenities. Though Exs.P105 and 106 would indicate fracture of shaft of left humorous, neither of them indicates any disability -6- NC: 2026:KHC-D:3697 MFA No. 101958 of 2015 HC-KAR caused due to same. In absence, claimant would not be entitled for any compensation towards loss of amenities. Thus point for consideration is answered 'partly in affirmative'. Consequently, following:
ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part.
ii. Claimant is held entitled for enhanced
compensation of ₹63,500/- as against
₹20,000/- awarded by Tribunal. Same shall carry interest at 6% per annum from date of claim petition till deposit.
iii. NWKRTC is directed to deposit enhanced compensation within a period of eight weeks.
iv. On deposit, entire compensation is ordered to be released in favour of claimant.
Sd/-
(RAVI V.HOSMANI) JUDGE CLK CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 24