Karnataka High Court
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd vs Shrishail S/O Nagayyaq Chulakimath on 27 November, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16569
MFA No. 103800 of 2017
HC-KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103800 OF 2017 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
THE BRANCH MANAGER,
BRANCH OFFICE, IIND FLOOR,
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR ROAD,
BELAGAVI, REPRESENTED BY
AUTHORISED SIGNATORY DEPUTY MANAGER.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. M.Y. KATAGI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRISHAIL S/O. NAGAYYAQ CHULAKIMATH,
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O: CHULAKI, TAL: SAUNDATTI,
DIST: BELAGAVI-591236.
GIRIJA A.
2. BABU S/O. GIRIYAPPA NIROLI,
BYAHATTI AGE: 61, OCC: DRIVER,
Digitally signed by
GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI
R/O: GIRIYAL, K.E., TAL: BAILHONGAL,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
DIST: BELAGAVI-590215.
DHARWAD BENCH
DHARWAD (OWNER OF VEHICLE 407, BEARING NO.KA-24/0962.)
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. J.S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO LLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED
FOR BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
01.04.2017 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL.
MACT, SAUNDATTI IN MVC NO.514/2015 WITH COSTS IN THE
INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16569
MFA No. 103800 of 2017
HC-KAR
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
1. Heard Sri. M. Y. Katagi, learned counsel for the
appellant as well as Ms.Shaila Bellikatti, learned
counsel for respondent No.1. Though Sri. J. S. Shetty
is on record representing respondent No.2, learned
counsel failed to make his appearance.
2. This appeal is the outcome of the award that is passed
by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Saundatti in MVC No.514/2015 dated 01.04.2017.
3. This appeal is filed by the insurer of the offending
vehicle against whom liability is fastened by the
Tribunal, with a contention that the compensation that
is granted by the Tribunal is exorbitant.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16569
HC-KAR
4. Making his submission with regard to the merits of the
matter, Sri. M. Y. Katagi, learned counsel for the
appellant states that the Tribunal, without any basis
took the notional income as Rs.15,000/- per month
and awarded exorbitant sum as compensation under
the heads 'loss of future earnings' and 'loss of income
during treatment period'. Learned counsel submits
that for the relevant period, for settlement of claims,
the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad, is
taking the notional income as Rs.7,500/- only and
hence the Tribunal ought to have taken the notional
income as Rs.7,500/- per month.
5. Per contra, Ms. Shaila Bellikatti, learned counsel for
respondent No.1, states that respondent No.1
produced sufficient proof that he was an agriculturist
as on the date of accident and therefore the Tribunal
took the notional income as Rs.15,000/- per month.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16569
HC-KAR
6. Respondent No.1 produced Exhibit P9 - Record of
Rights, to establish his occupation and that he was an
agriculturist as on the date of accident. The Tribunal
made a clear mention that, as per the contents of
Exhibit P9, the property therein stands in the name of
the father of respondent No.1. Thus the contents of
Exhibit P9 should not be held to be sufficient to hold
that respondent No.1 was an agriculturist as on the
date of accident. Therefore, the Tribunal ought not to
have considered the income of respondent No.1 as
Rs.15,000/- per month. Therefore, it has to be held
that the compensation granted towards 'loss of future
earnings' i.e., Rs.2,59,200/-, is on higher side.
7. As per the evidence produced, respondent No.1
sustained comminuted fracture of 4th and 5th fingers of
the right side. The Tribunal granted a sum of
Rs.40,000/- under the head 'pain and suffering', ,
Rs.15,414.45 towards 'Medical expenses', Rs.16,000/-
towards 'Attendant charges etc.,', Rs.2,59,200/-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16569
HC-KAR
towards 'loss of future earnings', Rs.30,000/- towards
'loss of income during laid-up period' and Rs.40,000/-
towards 'loss of amenities in life'.
8. Learned counsel for respondent No.1, Ms.Shaila
Bellikatti fairly states that the compensation thus
granted is slightly on higher side and therefore there
may be marginal reduction.
9. Considering the totality of the evidence produced, this
Court is of the view that the compensation that is
granted by the Tribunal, if reduced by Rs.90,000/-,
the remaining amount which respondent No.1 receives
will be highly justifiable.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant also exhibited his
grievance regarding the rate of interest. The Tribunal
held that the sum awarded as compensation shall
carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum. However,
as it is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant
that, for the relevant period the banking rate of
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16569
HC-KAR
interest for commercial transactions is 6% per annum,
which is not denied by learned counsel for respondent
No.1, this Court is of the view that the compensation
which respondent No.1 shall receive, which is payable
by the appellant, should carry interest at the rate of
6% per annum only.
11. Thus, the appeal is disposed of with the following
order:
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The compensation that is granted by the Additional
Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Saundatti through
orders in MVC No.514/2015 dated 01.04.2017 is
reduced by Rs.90,000/-.
iii. The compensation payable by the appellant to
respondent No.1 shall carry interest at the rate of
6% per annum from the date of petition till the date
of deposit.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:16569
HC-KAR
iv. Amount, if any in deposit be transmitted to the
concerned Tribunal forthwith.
Sd/-
(CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
gab
CT-MCK
