Muniyappa v. The Managing Dierctor

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3696 OF 2022(MV-I) BETWEEN:

MUNIYAPPA s/o BALARAJ, NOW AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO 196, THIGALA CHOWDADENAHALLI, DOMMASANDRA, BENGALURU …APPELLANT (BY SRI. A.K. BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. A. SREENIVASAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND:

THE MANAGING DIERCTOR BMTC DIVISION, CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560 027 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. D VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE)

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.06.12.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.5947/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL JUDGE by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

AND ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-13), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT

¶1The claimant, being dissatisfied with the compensation of Rs.1,53,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, is in appeal.

¶2The fact that the accident occurred and the further fact that the offending vehicle belongs to the BMTC are not in dispute.

¶3The Tribunal, on assessment of evidence, has awarded the following sums as compensation: Sl. No. Particulars Amount in (Rs.)

¶1Pain and sufferings 20,000

¶2Medical bills 12,730

¶3Food, nourishment and attendant charges 13,000

¶4Future medical expenses 15,000

¶5Loss of income during laid up period & rest period 13,000

¶6Loss of amenities 20,000

¶7Loss of future earnings 2,12,160

Sub-total 3,05,890

Less: 50% towards contributory negligence 1,52,945 Total 1,52,945 Rounded off to 1,53,000

¶4The Tribunal, on analysis of the medical evidence, has concluded that the claimant has suffered permanent disability to the extent of 8% to the whole body.

¶5I have perused the evidence of the Doctor - PW.2 and the wound certificate/disability certificate. The same depicts that the claimant has suffered from fracture medial malleolus and right ankle.

¶6Since the Doctor has assessed the disability to the right lower limb at 31% and whole body at 16%, considering the nature of the injuries suffered by the claimant, I deem it just

and appropriate to assess the disability at 11%. Accordingly, the disability suffered by the claimant would be at 11%.

¶7The Tribunal has determined the monthly income, notionally at Rs.13,000/- per month. Since there is no credible documentary evidence to ascertain the actual monthly income, it would be appropriate and prudent to adopt the monthly income determined by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, which, for the accident of the year 2019, would be Rs.14,000/-.

¶8As the claimant was aged 27 years, the Tribunal has rightly applied a multiplier of '17'. Consequently, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.3,14,160/- (14,000 x 12 x 17 x 11%) towards 'loss of future income' as against sum of Rs.2,12,160/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶9Having regard to the nature of injuries suffered by the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to Rs.42,000/- (14,000 X 3 months) towards 'loss of income during the laid up period' as against sum of Rs.13,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶10Having regard to the injuries suffered by the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards 'pain and suffering' as against Rs.20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶11Having regard to the lasting effects of the injuries on the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities, as against the sum of Rs.20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶12The sum awarded as medical expenses at Rs.12,730/- being based on the documentary evidence, do not call for modification and hence confirmed.

¶13The sums awarded under other heads of compensation granted by the Tribunal, remains unaltered.

¶14However, the Tribunal upon meticulous examination of the evidence on record, fixed 50% contributory negligence on the claimant. In my considered opinion, the said finding is just and proper and warrants no interference. Accordingly, the claimant is held liable for 50% of the contributory negligence.

¶15Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified and the claimant would be entitled to the following compensation: Sl. No. Compensation under different Heads As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) As awarded by this Court (Rs.)

¶1Pain and sufferings 20,000 50,000

¶2Medical bills 12,730 12,730

¶3Food, nourishment and attendant charges 13,000 13,000

¶4Future medical expenses 15,000 15,000

¶5Loss of income during laid up period & rest period 13,000 42,000

¶6Loss of amenities 20,000 30,000

¶7Loss of future earnings 2,12,160 3,14,160 Sub-total 3,05,890 4,76,890 Less: 50% towards contributory negligence 1,52,945 2,38,445 Total 1,52,945 2,38,445 Rounded off to 1,53,000

¶16Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total compensation of Rs.2,38,445/- as against Rs.1,53,000/-,

along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶17The BMTC is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE CR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15