1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

KALABURAGI BENCH

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY

MFA No.201514/2019 (MV)

BETWEEN:

SRI. TEJU S/O BASU RATHOD,

AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE

R/O: HEGADIHAL LT,

TQ & DIST: VIJAYAPUR.

... APPELLANT

(BY SRI. S.S. MAMADAPUR ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,

NEKRTC,

VIJAYAPURA-586101. ... RESPONDENT

(BY SMT. BHADRASHETTY SANGEETA C., ADVOCATE)

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED

UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,

1988

PRAYING

TO

ENHANCE

THE

COMPANSATION

AMOUNT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND

AWARD DATED 01-06-2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED III

ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER MACT-XII,

VIJAYAPUR, IN MVC NO.1597/2014.

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS

DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

2

JUDGMENT

Though this appeal is listed for admission, with

consent of learned counsel for both the parties, this appeal

is taken up for final disposal.

02.

This appeal is filed by the claimant seeking

enhancement of

compensation awarded

by

the III

Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT-XII, at Vijayapur

(henceforth referred as ‘Tribunal’) dated 01.06.2019 in

MVC.No.1597/2014.

03.

The records disclose that on 29.09.2013 at

01.30 p.m. the claimant was riding along with another on

a

motorcycle

bearing

Reg.No.KA-28-U-7962

from

Bagewadi to Managuli side. When they reached near

Mangammadevi Temple, a KSRTC Bus, belonging to the

respondent

bearing

Reg.No.KA-28-F-1564

(henceforth

referred as ‘offending vehicle’), being driven in a rash and

negligent manner, rear ended the motorcycle. As a result,

the claimant suffered injuries and was shifted to District

3

Government Hospital Vijayapur. The claimant contended

that the accident was due to the negligence of the driver of

the offending vehicle. Therefore, the claimant has filed a

claim petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act,

1988 claiming compensation of `.6,00,000/-.

04.

The claim petition was contested by the insurer

contending that three persons were proceeding on the

motorcycle and the rider of the motorcycle caused the

accident and was responsible for the accident.

05.

Based on these rival contentions, the claim

petition was set down for trial.

06.

The claimant was examined as PW.1 and he

marked documents as Exs.P.1 to 18. On the other hand,

the respondent examined its driver as RW.1, but no

documents were marked.

07.

Based on the oral and documentary evidence,

the Tribunal held that the accident was due to rash and

negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle.

4

Insofar as the claim for the compensation is concerned,

the Tribunal held that the claimant is entitled to a global

compensation at `.10,000/- having regard to the medical

expenses of `.1,380/- incurred by the claimant.

08.

Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and

award, the claimant has filed the present appeal.

09.

The learned counsel for the claimant contended

that the claimant had suffered injuries on his left palm,

abrasion injury over patellar, surface of left knee joint,

abrasion injury over right forearm, injury to dorsum and

other

injuries

and

thus

was

entitled

for

more

compensation. He contended that the Tribunal ought to

have awarded adequate compensation towards pain and

suffering and other conventional heads.

10.

Per contra, the learned counsel for the

respondent contended that the injuries sustained by the

claimant were simple in nature and there were no fractures

suffered by the claimant. There is no evidence with regard

5

to disability suffered by the claimant. Therefore, he

claimed that the judgment and award passed by the

Tribunal is just and proper.

11.

It is seen from the judgment and award of the

Tribunal that accident was due to rash and negligent on

the part of the driver of the offend