Karnataka High Court
The Divisional Manager vs Vasanth Mableshwar Shetty on 26 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16408
MFA No. 101389 of 2015
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101389 OF 2015 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
KAIKINI ROAD, KARWAR,
NOW REP. BY UDAY KUMAR,
DEPUTY MANAGER,
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
REGIONAL OFFICE, TP. HUB
ENKAY COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR, HUBLI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. N.R. KUPPELUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
GIRIJA A.
BYAHATTI 1. VASANTH MABLESHWAR SHETTY,
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI
SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR'S
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD 1(A) SUJATHA W/O. VASANTH SHETTY,
W/O. LATE VASANTH MABLESHWAR SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/O. MELINAKERI, GOKARN POST,
KUMTA TALUK, UTTAR KANNADA DISTRICT.
1(B) GAMESH VASANT SHETTY,
S/O. LATE VASANTH MABLESHWAR SHETTY,
AGED ABOUT 10 YEARS,
R/O. MELINAKERI, GOKARN POST,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16408
MFA No. 101389 of 2015
HC-KAR
KUMTA TALUK, UTTAR KANNADA DISTRICT.
REPRESEBTED BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN
MOTHER SUJATHA VASANTHA SHETTY.
2. IMTIYAZ BASHASHAB CHAVATI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER,
R/O. SRIRAM COLONY,
RAMANBAIL, SIRSI, KARWAR.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K. RAGHAVENDRA RAO AND
MS. V. VIDYA IYER, ADVOCATES FOR R1(A) AND R1(B);
NOTICE TO R2 HELD SUFFICIENT)
---
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS, HEAR THE
PARTIES AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR BY SETTING
ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.01.2015 PASSED
BY THE ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
SIRSI IN MVC NO.44/2013 WITH COSTS AND INTEREST IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16408
MFA No. 101389 of 2015
HC-KAR
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
1. Heard Sri. N. R. Kuppelur, learned counsel for the
appellant as well as Ms.Vidya Iyer, learned counsel for
respondents 1(a) and 1(b).
2. Being aggrieved by the sum that is awarded as
compensation by the Additional Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Sirsi through orders in MVC No.44/2013
dated 22.01.2015, the insurer of the offending vehicle
against whom liability is fixed, presented this appeal
with a contention that the sum awarded as
compensation is high and exorbitant.
3. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant,
Sri. N. R. Kuppelur submits that the injured Vasanth
Mableshwar Shetty (hereinafter referred to as "the
injured" for convenience of discussion) was working as
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16408
HC-KAR
Principal in a Government school as on the date of
accident. After recovery, he continued to work in the
same capacity. Thus, there is no loss of earnings due
to the injuries sustained and disability. The evidence
produced by the injured himself goes to show his
occupation as on the date of accident and that he
continued his service even after the date of accident.
But without considering said fact, the Tribunal
awarded huge sum of Rs.4,20,000/- towards loss of
earnings due to permanent functional disability.
Learned counsel thereby seeks to reduce
Rs.4,20,000/- out of the sum that is awarded as
compensation.
4. Per contra, Ms.Vidya Iyer, learned counsel who
represents respondents No.1(a) and 1(b), who came
on record on the death of injured during the pendency
of the appeal, submits that though the injured
continued in service even after the accident, he
attended the duties with difficulty due to disability.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16408
HC-KAR
Learned counsel also states that the compensation
granted by the Tribunal under all other heads is on
lower side, and therefore considering the sum which
the injured is entitled to as compensation, necessary
orders may be passed.
5. It is not in dispute that the injured sustained four
injuries during the course of accident, of which two are
grievous in nature. Equally, it is not in dispute that
during the course of treatment as inpatient for 29
days, the injured underwent a surgery also. As per
the evidence of PW2, injured is left with permanent
physical disability of 30% in respect of left lower limb.
The tribunal took the disability in respect of the whole
body as 10%. Admittedly, injured was working as
Principal in Murarji School, Yellapur as on the date of
accident. There is no denial of the fact that the
injured continued in service after recovery. However,
the injured can be safely held to have attended his
duties with disability of 10% in respect of the whole
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16408
HC-KAR
body. Therefore, his performance might have been
diminished to certain extent at his office. Further for
travelling to and fro from his house to the place of
work he would have certainly faced some difficulty.
6. Considering these factors, and also taking into
consideration the sum that is awarded as
compensation by the Tribunal under all other heads,
this Court is of the view that, if the compensation that
is granted by the Tribunal is reduced by Rs.2,38,000/-
the balance of amount which will be payable can be
held to be justifiable. Therefore, the appeal is disposed
of with the following order:
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The compensation that is payable by the appellant
as per the orders in MVC No.44/2013 dated
22.01.2015 passed by the Additional Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Sirsi is reduced by Rs.2,38,000/-.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16408
HC-KAR
iii. Amount, if any, in deposit, be transmitted to the
concerned Tribunal immediately.
Sd/-
(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
gab
CT-MCK
