[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Ashwini D/O Basanappa Tallur vs The Divisional Controller on 17 February, 2026

                                                   -1-
                                                                 MFA No.101211 of 2016




                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
                             DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
                                                 BEFORE
                             THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
                          MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101211 OF 2016 (MV)
                   BETWEEN:
                   KUMARI ASHWINI
                   D/O BASANAPPA TALLUR
                   AGE: 16 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
                   R/O: NAGANUR, TQ: BAILHONGAL,
                   DIST: BELAGAVI.

                   SINCE MINOR RPTD BY HER NATURAL FATHER-

                   SHRI BASAPPA S/O SHIVANAPPA TALLUR,
                   AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
                   R/O: NAGANUR, TQ: BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI.
                                                                           ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SRI. HANAMANT R. LATUR, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:
                   THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
                   NWKRTC, BELAGAVI.
                                                                       ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SRI. M.K. SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE)

                          THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION
Digitally signed
by                 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE
MOHANKUMAR
B SHELAR
Location: High
Court of
                   COMPENSATION BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED
Karnataka,
Dharwad Bench
                   BY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. M.A.C.T., BAILHONGAL, IN MVC
                   NO.1323/2014 DATED 02.01.2016 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND
                   EQUITY.


                          THIS    MFA   HAVING   BEEN    HEARD   AND   RESERVED     FOR
                   JUDGMENT ON 05.02.2026 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT
                   THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:


                   CORAM:        THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO
                                  -2-
                                               MFA No.101211 of 2016




                           CAV JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is filed by the minor claimant

represented by her natural guardian under Section 173(1) of

the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, calling in question the judgment

and award dated 02.01.2016 passed in MVC No.1323/2014 on

the file of the Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal, Bailhongal, seeking enhancement of

compensation.

2. Facts leading to filing of the appeal are that the

appellant was aged about 14 years at the time of the accident

that occurred on 09.12.2013. On that day, at about 9.30 a.m.,

while the minor claimant was proceeding from Naganur towards

her school on her bicycle on the left side of the road, when she

reached near the land of one Sidram S. Mathad on Naganur

Road, the driver of NWKRTC bus bearing registration No. KA-

22/F-1368, coming from the opposite direction, drove the

vehicle in a rash and negligent manner without observing traffic

rules and dashed against the claimant, resulting in the accident.

3. Due to the impact, the minor claimant sustained

grievous injuries. She was admitted to Malaprabha Multi

Speciality Hospital, Bailhongal, where she was treated by

Dr.C.D.Kulkarni as an inpatient from 09.12.2013 to 15.12.2013,

i.e., for seven days. She underwent conservative treatment and

surgical intervention by way of closed reduction nailing. It is

stated that the father of the claimant incurred medical and

incidental expenses amounting to about Rs.30,000/-. After

discharge, she was advised follow-up treatment.

4. It is further contended that prior to the accident, the

claimant was hale and healthy and a bright student, and due to

the injuries sustained, she has become weak and is unable to

attend to her normal activities and has suffered permanent

disability. The accident was registered by Nesargi Police in

Crime No.141/2013 for offences punishable under Sections 279

and 338 of IPC against the driver of the offending bus. The

respondent, being the owner-cum-insurer of the bus, is liable to

pay compensation.

5. The claimant filed a petition seeking compensation of

Rs.5,00,000/-. The Tribunal, by judgment and award dated

02.01.2016, held that the accident occurred due to the rash and

negligent driving of the offending bus and awarded total

compensation of Rs.1,22,000/- with interest at 9% per annum

from the date of petition till deposit. Aggrieved by the quantum

of compensation, the present appeal is filed.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

Tribunal has failed to award any compensation towards

permanent disability though the claimant suffered fracture of

radius and ulna of the right hand and disability assessed at 20%

to the right upper limb. It is contended that the compensation

awarded under various heads is on the lower side and that the

Tribunal has not properly applied the principles laid down by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional

Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., reported in 2013

ACJ 2445. Hence, he seeks enhancement of compensation.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-

Corporation submits that the judgment and award passed by

the Tribunal is just and reasonable. It is contended that the

decision in Master Mallikarjun is not applicable to the facts of

the present case and that no interference is warranted. The

point that arises for consideration is:

"Whether the claimant has made out a case for enhancement of compensation, and if so, to what extent?"

8. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and

on perusal of the material on record, it is not in dispute that the

claimant was a minor aged about 14 years at the time of the

accident and that she sustained fracture of radius and ulna of

the right hand along with other injuries. The medical evidence

discloses that the claimant has suffered disability to the extent

of 20% to the right upper limb. The Tribunal has awarded a sum

of Rs.60,000/- towards pain and suffering and loss of amenities,

Rs.12,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.20,000/- towards

loss of income of the guardian during the period of treatment,

and Rs.10,000/- towards incidental and miscellaneous

expenses. No separate compensation has been awarded

towards permanent disability.

9. It is true that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Master

Mallikarjun has laid down structured guidelines for awarding

compensation in cases where children suffer permanent

disability. However, the application of the said guidelines is not

automatic and depends upon the nature of injuries, the extent

of disability and its impact on the future prospects of the child.

10. In the present case, the disability assessed is

confined to the right upper limb. There is no material placed on

record to show that such disability has resulted in functional

disability affecting the future earning capacity or educational

prospects of the minor claimant. The injuries, though grievous,

are not shown to be of such severity as to warrant

compensation under the higher slab contemplated in Master

Mallikarjun.

11. However, having regard to the age of the claimant,

the nature of injuries sustained, the period of hospitalization

and the discomfort and hardship likely to be suffered on account

of residual disability, this Court is of the considered opinion that

the compensation awarded towards pain and suffering and loss

of amenities is on the lower side. Therefore, some enhancement

under the said head is justified.

12. This Court deems it appropriate to award an

additional sum of Rs.40,000/- towards pain, suffering and loss

of amenities. The compensation awarded under other heads by

the Tribunal is found to be just and reasonable and does not call

for interference. Accordingly, the compensation is re-

determined as under:

Pain and suffering and amenities - Rs.1,00,000/- Medical and hospital charges - Rs. 12,000/-

Nourishment charges                               - Rs. 15,000/-
Loss of income during treatment period
Of the guardian of petitioner                     - Rs. 20,000/-
Attendant charges                                 - Rs. 15,000/-

Total                                             - Rs.1,62,000/-

13. Accordingly, the total compensation stands enhanced

from Rs.1,22,000/- to Rs.1,62,000/-. In the result, this Court

proceeds to pass the following:

ORDER

i. The appeal is allowed-in-part.

ii. The judgment and award dated 02.01.2016 passed

in MVC No.1323/2014 by the Senior Civil Judge

and Addl. MACT, Bailhongal, is hereby modified.

iii. The claimant is entitled to an enhanced

compensation of Rs.40,000/-, in addition to

Rs.1,22,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, making

the total compensation Rs.1,62,000/-.

iv. The enhanced compensation of Rs.40,000/- shall

carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of

petition till the date of deposit.

v. The respondent-Corporation shall deposit the

enhanced compensation along with interest within

a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a

certified copy of this judgment.

vi. The amount shall be disbursed in accordance with

law, keeping in view that the claimant is a minor.