IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101768/2018 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

UTTAM S/O. NAMADEV GADADE, AGE: 20 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O: TURMARI, TQ & DIST: BELAGAVI-591106.

…APPELLANT (BY SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE)

GIRIJA A.

BYAHATTI AND Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATT I Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD 1. MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, (MSRTC) SANGLI-416403 TQ: MIRAJ, DIST: SANGLI, STATE: MAHARASHTRA, BY ITS DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER.

2. BHANUDAS S/O. MAHADEV PATIL, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: DUDHEBHAVI, TQ: KAVATEMAHANKAL, DIST: SANGLI-416403, STATE: MAHARASHTRA, (OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE NO.MH-10/CC-9939)

3. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., OFFICE NO.1, 4^TH FLOOR, SHRI KRISHNA TOWER-14, KHANAPUR ROAD, TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI-590016, BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, (INSURER OF MOTOR CYCLE NO.MH-10/CC-9939)

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C.V. ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. UMESH AINAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;

NOTICE TO R3 DISPENSED WITH)

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 10.01.2018 IN M.V.C. NO.2361/2016 PASSED BY THE IX ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED IN THE CLAIM PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING 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.Madanmohan M. Khannur learned counsel for the appellant, as well as Sri.C. V. Angadi, learned counsel for respondent No.1. No representation for respondent No.2 on call.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the award that is passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’, for brevity) in MVC No.2361/2016 dated 10.01.2018. This is a claimant’s appeal.

3. On the ground that he sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident, the appellant filed a petition claiming compensation. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation, and projecting that the said sum is grossly low, the present appeal is filed.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant sustained three grievous injuries in the road traffic accident and he took extensive treatment. However, he is left with disability. But without considering the evidence produced, the Tribunal granted a sum of Rs.50,000/- globally as compensation, which is unjustifiable. Learned counsel thereby seeks for enhancement in compensation.

5. The submission that is made by learned counsel for respondent No.1, on the other hand, is that the appellant was a student on the date of the accident and thus he had no source of earnings. Also, the injuries sustained, though grievous, did not result in such physical disability as contended by the appellant, and therefore, the Tribunal is right in awarding Rs.50,000/- as global compensation.

6. By all the evidence produced, the appellant succeeded in establishing that he sustained fracture of the right clavicle, fracture of the 3^rd to 5^th ribs right, and fracture of distal end of ulna, which are grievous in nature. The appellant also succeeded in establishing that he took treatment as an in-patient for a period of one week.

7. As per the evidence of PW3, the appellant is suffering with permanent disability of 20% in respect of the left upper limb and 10% in respect of the right upper limb. The Tribunal is of the opinion that at young age the healing process will be better and, gradually, the disability and pain will disappear. However, considering the nature of injuries sustained, this Court is of the view that the appellant would have suffered a lot during the period of treatment and there w