IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2671 OF 2018 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER K.S.R.T.C BUS STAND LALBAGH MANGALURU DAKSHINA KANNADA - 574214 NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS THE CHIEF LAW OFFICER K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR BENGALURU - 560027 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ASHOK NARAYAN NAYAK.,ADVOCATE)

AND:

Digitally signed

1. K.S.RAGHAVENDRA by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH S/O SEENAPPA GOWDA COURT OF KARNATAKA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT KARNETHODI HOUSE ODILNALA POST & VILLAGE BELTHANGADY D.K.DISTRICT - 574214 2. SRI.H.B.LOKAYYA S/O H.B.BORAYYA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS RESIDING AT BOLANGADY HOUSE PANEMANGALURU POST AND VILLAGE BANTWALA TALUK D K DISTRICT - 574214

3. SRI.RAMANA GOWDA GOWDER S/O LATE YALLANNA GOWDA AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS GANGOOR HOUSE & VILLAGE CHITARAGI POST HUNAGUNDA TALUK BAGALKOTE DIST - 587101 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.G.RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADVOCATE FOR R.1;

R.3 - SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED;

NOTICE TO R.2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT V/O/D 20.12.2023 )

THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.11.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.452/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE M.A.C.T. AND I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.3,42,500/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF ITS REALIZATION AND ETC.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

ORAL JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellant - Corporation calling in question the judgment and award dated

02.11.2017 passed in MVC No.452/2017 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and I Additional Senior Civil Judge at Mangaluru, D.K., (for short 'Tribunal') allowing the claim petition in part granting compensation of Rs.3,42,500/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.

for the injuries suffered in the accident.

2. The date of incident, involvement of the vehicle and injuries suffered by the respondent - claimant are not in dispute. The only dispute, as per the Corporation, is with respect of the contributory negligence on the injured, which, according to the Corporation, is not considered by the Tribunal.

3. Heard Sri.Ashok Narayan Nayak, learned counsel for the appellant - Corporation and Sri.G.Ravishankar Shastry, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1. Respondent No.3 is served and unrepresented. Vide order dated 20.12.2023, notice of this appeal on respondent No.2 is held sufficient.

4. On two grounds, the appellant - Corporation is in appeal i.e., Firstly, the liability on the ground that the Tribunal has failed to fasten the contributory negligence on the Injured, who was the Driver of the Car also responsible for the incident and secondly, on the ground of quantum contending that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is exorbitant and requires re-consideration.

5. So far as contributory negligence is concerned, learned counsel appearing for Sri.Ashok Narayan Nayak, with all vehemence submits that the Tribunal has not considered the evidence of the Driver - R.W.1, wherein he has clearly stated that though the bus was moving on its side observing all the traffic rules, the Driver of the Car - injured herein came in a rash and negligent manner, lost control over the Car and dashed against the bus going on the wrong side of the road. The Tribunal has failed to consider the said aspect of the matter and fastened the entire liability on the Driver of the Corporation Bus only on the ground that the police have registered case against the Driver so also filed the charge sheet.

6. So far as the compensation is concerned, it is stated that for simple fractures to hip joint, Nasal Bone, right femur, posterior hip dislocation and posterior acetabulum wall facture, the Tribunal has awarded exorbitant compensation of ₹.3,42,500/-. A sum of ₹.1,55,000/- awarded under the medical head is highly exorbi