Karnataka High Court
The Managing Director vs Mahadev S/O Muttappa Hidakal on 10 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15314
MFA No. 101790 of 2015
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101790 OF 2015 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
N.W.K.R.T.C.,
BIJAPURA DIVISION, BIJAPURA.
THROUGH ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
NWKRTC, BELAGAVI DIVISION,
BELAGAVI.
REPRESENTED BY THE
CHIEF LAW OFFICER,
NWKRTC, CENTRAL OFFICE,
GOKUL ROAD, HUBBALLI.
GIRIJA A. (OWNER CUM-INSURER OF NWKRTC
BYAHATTI
BUS BEARING REG. NO. KA-28/F-877)
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI
Location: HIGH COURT
...APPELLANT
OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD
(BY SRI. I.C. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
MR. MAHADEV
S/O. MUTTAPPA HIDAKAL,
AGE: 45 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURE COOLIE,
R/O: MUGALKHOD, TAL: RAIBAG,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15314
MFA No. 101790 of 2015
HC-KAR
DIST: BELAGAVI.
(SINCE UNSOUND REPRESENTED BY HIS
NEXT FRIEND-GUARDIAN,
SHRI MUTTAPPA
S/O. YALLAPPA HIDAKAL,
AGE: 66 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: MUGALKHOD, TQ: RAIBAG,
DIST: BELAGAVI, AS PER IA.NO.3)
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. ASHOK A. NAIK, ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
1988 PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN MVC NO.2075/2013
ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, AT RAIBAG TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.01.2015 PASSED IN M.V.C.
NO.2075/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, AT RAIBAG, AS
COMPENSATION AWARDED IS EXCESSIVE AND EXORBITANT
AND PETITION IS NOT MAINTAINABLE, BY ALLOWING THIS
APPEAL.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15314
MFA No. 101790 of 2015
HC-KAR
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
Heard Sri.I.C.Patil, learned counsel for the appellant
as well as the Sri.Ashok A.Naik, learned counsel for the
respondent. With a contention that the compensation that is
granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raibag
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for brevity) through
orders in M.V.C. No.2075/2013 dated 27.01.2015 is high
and exorbitant, the respondent therein preferred the
present appeal.
2. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the respondent failed to produce any
proof with regard to his occupation and earnings as on the
date of accident. But the Tribunal took the notional income
as Rs.7,000/- per month. Learned counsel submits that the
accident occurred in the year 2006 and for the relevant
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15314
HC-KAR
period, the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad
is taking the notional income as Rs.3,750/- per month and
hence, adopting the said figure, the compensation granted
under the head 'loss of future earnings' is required to be
reduced. Learned counsel further submits that a huge sum
of Rs.50,000/- is awarded for pain and suffering. But the
respondent sustained only one grievous injury and thus, the
said amount is on higher side. Learned counsel ultimately
seeks for reduction of the sum that is awarded as
compensation in favour of the respondent.
3. On the other hand, the submission that is made
by learned counsel for the respondent is that the
respondent sustained grievous injury and got admitted in
hospital for treatment. Learned counsel states that the
respondent is left with disability of 40% in respect of right
lower limb. But without considering these aspects, the
Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.6,000/- only towards loss of
earnings during laid up period. Learned counsel also
submits that the Tribunal did not award any compensation
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15314
HC-KAR
towards loss of amenities in life and thus, there are no
grounds to reduce the amount further.
4. As rightly contented by learned counsel for the
appellant, the respondent failed to produce any proof with
regard to his occupation and earnings as on the date of
accident. On what basis the Tribunal took notional income
as Rs.7,000/- per month is not clarified in the impugned
order. Also as rightly contented, the compensation granted
towards pain and suffering that is Rs.50,000/- is on higher
side. At the same time, the compensation granted towards
loss of earnings during laid up period that is Rs.6,000/- is
on lower side. Also the appellant is entitled to certain
amount towards loss of amenities in life. However,
considering the fact that the Tribunal awarded exorbitant
sum as compensation under the head pain and suffering
and towards loss of future earnings and that the Tribunal
ought to have taken the notional income as Rs.3,750/- per
month and further taking into consideration the fact that
the compensation granted towards loss of earnings during
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15314
HC-KAR
laid up period is on lower side and that the respondent is
entitled to certain amount towards loss of amenities in life,
this Court is of the view that the compensation that is
granted by the Tribunal is to be reduced to an extent of
Rs.40,000/- only. Therefore, the appeal is disposed with the
following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The compensation that is granted by the
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raibag
through orders in M.V.C. No.2075/2013
dated 27.01.2015 is reduced by
Rs.40,000/-.
(iii) The observations of the Tribunal on all
other aspects holds good.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:15314
HC-KAR
(iv) Amount if any in deposit, be transmitted
to the concerned Tribunal immediately.
Sd/-
(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
RH
CT-MCK
