Karnataka High Court
Master Preetam S/O Sanjiveev Kalluri vs The Divisional Controller on 4 September, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
MFA No. 102896 of 2015
C/W MFA No. 102895 of 2015
MFA No. 102898 of 2015
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102896 OF 2015 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102895 OF 2015
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102898 OF 2015
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102899 OF 2015
IN MFA NO.102896 OF 2015
BETWEEN:
MASTER PREETAM S/O SANJIVEEV KALLURI
AGE: 02 YEARS, SINCE MINOR, REP BY HIS
NATURAL FATHER AND MINOR GUARDIAN
SHRI. SANJEEV S/O SHIVALING KALLURI
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS (NOW NIL)
R/O: NEW IDALHOND (SHIVAPUR) VILLAGE
TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. GEETHA K M @ PAWAR, ADV)
AND:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
MOHANKUMAR
B SHELAR NWKRTC BELAGAVI DIVISION
BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENT
Digitally signed by
MOHANKUMAR B (BY SRI. S C BHUTI, ADV)
SHELAR
Date: 2025.09.11
12:09:36 +0530 THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.03.2015, PASSED IN MVC
NO.163/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK
COURT-II AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
MFA No. 102896 of 2015
C/W MFA No. 102895 of 2015
MFA No. 102898 of 2015
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
IN MFA NO. 102895 OF 2015
BETWEEN:
BABY, MANJULA D/O SANJEEV KALLURI
AGE: 04 YEARS, SINCE MINOR REP BY HER
NATURAL FATHER AND MINOR GUARDIAN
SHRI. SANJEEV S/O. SHIVALING KALLURI
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS (NOW NIL)
R/O: NEW IDALHOND(SHIVAPUR) VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GEETHA K M @ PAWAR, ADV)
AND:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
NWKRTC BELAGAVI DIVISION
BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. S.C. BHUTI, ADV)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.03.2015, PASSED IN MVC
NO.162/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK
COURT-II AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA NO. 102898 OF 2015
BETWEEN:
SMT. SUMITRA SANJEEV KALLURI
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR WORK AND
CONSTRUCTION WORK NOW NILL
R/O: NEW LDALHOND(SHIVAPUR) VILLAGE,
TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SMT GEETHA K M @ PAWAR, ADV)
AND:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
N W K R T C BELAGAVI
DIVISION BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. S C BHUTI, ADV)
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
MFA No. 102896 of 2015
C/W MFA No. 102895 of 2015
MFA No. 102898 of 2015
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 25.03.2015, PASSED IN MVC.
NO.273/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK
COURT-II & MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION & SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA NO. 102899 OF 2015
BETWEEN:
SHRI. SANJEEV S/O SHIVALING KALLURI
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS (NOW NIL)
R/O: NEW IDALHOND(SHIVAPUR) VILLAGE
TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SMT GEETHA K M @ PAWAR, ADV)
AND:
THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
NWKRTC BELAGAVI
DIVISION BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. S.C. BHUTI, ADV)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 25.03.2015, PASSED IN MVC.
NO.301/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST
TRACK COURT-II AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, BELAGAVI, DISMISSING
THE PETITION FILED U/S.166 OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
JUDGEMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AS HOK S. KINAGI
-4-
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
MFA No. 102896 of 2015
C/W MFA No. 102895 of 2015
MFA No. 102898 of 2015
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)
These Appeals are filed by the petitioners, challenging
a common judgment and award dated 25.03.2015 passed in
MVCs No.162/2015, 163/2015, 273/2015 and 301/2015 by
the Fast Track Court-II, and Additional MACT, Belagavi ('the
Tribunal' for short).
2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of these
appeals are as follows:
2.1. On 28.06.2014, at about 15:00 hours, the
petitioners in all the cases were travelling in a tempo
bearing Reg.No.KA-49-327 owned by the petitioner in MVC
No.301/2015. At that time, the driver of the NWKRTC bus
bearing Reg.No.KA-22/F-1743 drove the same at a high
speed, in the rash and negligent manner, and dashed to the
tempo. As a result, the petitioners have sustained a
grievous injuries. The petitioner in MVC No.301/2015 filed
a claim petition for claiming damages caused to the tempo.
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
The petitioners in other MVCs filed claim the petitions under
Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking a
compensation for the injuries sustained in a road traffic
accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petitions.
3. The NWKRTC filed a statement of objections
denying the averments made in the claim petition except
admitting the ownership over the offending bus and it is
contended that, there was no negligence on the part of the
driver of the offending bus. Hence, prays to dismiss the
claim petition.
4. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the
parties, clubbed all the claim petitions, and framed the
common issues in all the claim petitions, except framing the
separate issues for MVC NO. 301/2015.
5. The petitioners in MVCs No.301/2015 and
273/2015, were examined as PWs-1 and 2, and marked
twenty-one documents as Exs.P1 to P21. They have also
examined the Doctors as PWs-3 and 5, and the Proprietor of
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
the Shivaji Motor Body Building Workshop was examined as
PW-4. In rebuttal, the respondent- NWKRTC, neither led
any oral nor documentary evidence.
6. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and
documentary evidence, partly allowed the claim petition
with costs in MVC No.162/2015 and awarded a
compensation of Rs.2,30,000/-; partly allowed the claim
petition with costs in MVC No.163/2015 and awarded a
compensation of Rs.5,000/-; partly allowed the claim
petition with costs in MVC No.273/2015 and awarded a
compensation of Rs.1,25,000/-; and dismissed the claim
petition in MVC No.301/2015, vide common judgement and
award dated 25.03.2015.
7. The petitioners in MVCs No.163/2015, 162/2015
and 273/2015 filed the appeals in MFAs No.102896/2015,
102895/2015 and 102898/2015 seeking an enhancement of
the compensation, and the petitioner in MVC No.301/2015
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
filed an appeal in MFA No.102899/2015, aggrieved by the
dismissal of the claim petition.
8. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the
parties.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that,
the amounts of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on
the lower side. She submits that, in MVC No.163/2015, the
petitioner is a minor and he sustained the grievous injuries
and the Tribunal awarded a global compensation of
Rs.5,000/-. She further submits that, the compensations
awarded in MVCs No.162/2015 and 273/2015 are also on
the lower side. She submits that, the petitioner in MVC
No.301/2015 examined the Proprietor of Shivaji Motor Body
Building Workshop as PW-4, who deposed that the vehicle
was left in the garage and the cost of estimation of the
repair is Rs.3,77,041/-. The Tribunal, without considering
the evidence of PW-4, committed an error in dismissing the
claim petition in MVC No.301/2015. Hence, on these
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
grounds, she prays to allow the appeals filed by the
petitioners.
10. Per contra, learned counsel for NWKRTC
supported the impugned judgment and award and
submitted that, the compensations awarded by the Tribunal
are just and proper and do not call for interreference by this
court. The Tribunal has rightly dismissed the claim petition
in MVC No.301/2015. He submits that, the petitioner in
MVC No.301/2015 has not produced any records or bills to
establish that he got repaired the vehicle. Hence, on these
grounds, he prays to dismiss the appeals.
11. Perused the records and considered the
submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The
point that would arise for consideration in these appeals are
regarding the quantum of compensation.
12. The petitioners, to prove that, the accident had
occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver
of the NWKRTC bus, produced a charge sheet marked as
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
Ex.P9. The Tribunal, placing reliance on Ex.P9, has rightly
held that the accident occurred due to the rash and
negligent driving of the driver of the offending bus.
Reg. Quantum of compensation:
13. Insofar as the quantum of compensation in MFA
No.102896/2015 (MVC No.163/2015) is concerned, the
wound certificate which is marked at Ex.P7, which discloses
that the petitioner had sustained one simple injury and was
aged 2 years old. No medical bills were produced. The
Tribunal has awarded a global compensation of Rs.5,000/-,
which is on the lower side and the same needs to be
accordingly enhanced to Rs.20,000/- including the amount
of global compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
14. Insofar as the quantum of compensation in MFA
No.102895/2015 (MVC No.162/2015) is concerned, the
wound certificate which is marked at Ex.P6 , discloses that
the petitioner was aged 4 years old. Considering the
evidence of the Doctor- PW-5, the Tribunal was justified in
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
assessing that the petitioner has suffered a permanent
disability of 15% and it was also justified in awarding a
compensation of Rs.2,30,000/-. I do not find any error in
the award passed by the Tribunal.
15. Insofar as the quantum of compensation in MFA
No.102898/2015 (MVC No.273/2015) is concerned, the
petitioner has produced the wound certificate marked at
Ex.P.15, which discloses that the petitioner was aged 28
years old as of the date of the accident. As per the
disability certificate marked as Ex.P19 and the opinion of
the Doctor, the petitioner has suffered 48% disability to the
limb and 16% to the whole body. The accident occurred in
2014. The petitioner, to prove her income, has not
produced any proof of income. In the absence of proof of
income, this Court assesses the monthly income at
Rs.7,500/- as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka
State Legal Services Authority. In addition to her income,
40% of the future prospects have to be added as per the
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi and
Others1. Thus, her monthly income comes to Rs.7,500/- +
40% = Rs.10,500/-. Therefore, this Court re-assesses the
compensation under the following heads:
Compensation awarded in
Rs.
Particulars By the By this
Tribunal Court
Pain and sufferings 30,000/- 50,000/-
Loss of future happiness 30,000/- 40,000/-
and amenities
Loss of income during 13,000/- 10,500/-
treatment period
Incidental charges 12,000/- 15,000/-
Medical expenses 40,000/- 40,000/-
Future medical expenses 10,000/- 20,000/-
Loss of future earnings 3,42,720/-
- (10,500 x 12 x
17 x 16%)
Total 1,35,000/- 5,18,220/-
Enhanced by this Court 3,83,220/-
15.1. Thus, the petitioner is entitled to a total
compensation of Rs. 5,18,220/- as against Rs. 1,35,000/-
i.e., to an enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,83,220/-.
2017 (16) SCC 680
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
16. Insofar as MFA No.102899/2015 (MVC
No.301/2015) filed by the owner of tempo is concerned, the
petitioner claims the compensation for damages caused to
the tempo on account of the accident. To establish that he
got repaired the tempo, and spent an amount towards
repair, the petitioner has not produced any bills. In the
absence of evidence on record, the Tribunal was justified in
dismissing the claim petition filed by the owner of the
tempo. I do not find any reason to interfere with the
impugned judgment passed in MVC No.301/2015.
17. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to
pass the following:
ORDER
i. MFAs No.102896/2015 and 102898/2015 are
allowed-in-part;
ii. The petitioner in MVC No.163/2015 is entitled to
a global compensation of Rs.20,000/- with
interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of
the petition till its realisation;
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC-D:11344
HC-KAR AND 1 OTHER
iii. The petitioner in MVC No.273/2015 is entitled to
an enhanced compensation of Rs.3,83,220/- with
interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of
the petition till its realisation;
iv. MFAs No.102895/2015 and 102899/2015 are
dismissed;
v. The respondent-NWKRTC is directed to deposit
the respective compensation amounts with
accrued interest within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment.
vi. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, shall
stand disposed of.
vii. Amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to
the tribunal.
Sd/-
(ASHOK S. KINAGI)
JUDGE
PA
CT: BSB
