Sagar S/O Ramakant Padti Vs the Registrar

¶1

1 -

¶2

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11625 MFA No. 100340 of 2014

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 09^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100340 OF 2014 (MV-)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SAGAR S/O RAMAKANT PADTI AGE: 12 YEARS, OCC: NIL, THE APPELLANT IS MINOR R/BY HIS FATHER RAMAKANT S/O PANDURANG PADTI R/O. NEAR GANAPATHI TEMPLE, MUDGA AMDHALLI, KARWAR.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. KAVERI G. KURUVATTI, ADV)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE REGISTRAR KARNATAKA LOKAYUKTA, M S BUILDING, DR. B AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU (OWNER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA 42/G -516).

¶12

KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT INSURANCE DEPARTMENT, MOTOR BRANCH, BENGALURU.

¶13

…RESPONDENTS

¶14

MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR

¶15

Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.12 16:35:53 +0530

¶16

(BY SRI. ANIL KALE, ADV FOR R1, SRI. ABHISHEK MALI PATIL, HCGP FOR R2)

¶17

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.02.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.37/2012 ON THE FILE OF MEMBER, II ADDL. MACT, KARWAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶18

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER :

¶19

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI

¶20

2 -

¶21

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11625 MFA No. 100340 of 2014

¶22

HC-KAR

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶24

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI)

¶25

This Appeal is filed by the petitioner, being

¶26

dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, vide Judgment and award dated 18.02.2013 in MVC No.37/2012, passed by the learned 2^nd Addl. M.A.C.T., Karwar (for short ‘ the Tribunal’ ).

¶27

For convenience, the parties are referred to based on their rankings before the Tribunal.

¶28

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows:

¶29

The petitioner was a minor, and the claim petition was filed by his father being natural guardian. On 04.10.2011, the minor petitioner was crossing the National Highway-17 at the place situated in front of Lord Veeraganapati Temple at Amadalli village, in Karwar. The Government Jeep bearing registration No.KA-42/G-516, belonging to the Karnataka Lokayukta, came in a rash and negligent manner

¶30

3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11625 MFA No. 100340 of 2014

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

and hit the minor petitioner. As a result, the petitioner sustained grievous injuries, and the father of petitioner spent a huge amount towards the medical and the other expenses. Hence, a claim petition was filed.

¶33

The respondents before the tribunal, filed a statement of objections, denying the averments made in the claim petition, and contented that the accident occurred due to the negligence act of the minor petitioner himself. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition.

¶34

The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues.

¶35

The petitioner’s father was examined as PW-1, and marked 9 documents. The respondents did not lead any oral evidence; however, produced 5 documents, marked as Ex.R1 to R5.

¶36

The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgement dated 18.02.2013 and awarded a

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11625 MFA No. 100340 of 2014

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

compensation of Rs.10,500/-, and directed the respondents to pay the compensation amount.

¶41

The petitioner, being dissatisfied with the

¶42

quantum of compensation, filed this Miscellaneous First Appeal seeking an enhancement of compensation.

¶43

Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel Sri.Anil Kale for respondent No.1 herein, and the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.2 herein.

¶44

Learned counsel Sri.K.L.Patil submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side, as the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries. Hence, he prays to allow the appeal by enhancing the compensation.

¶45

Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper, and do not call for any interference by this court. Accordingly, prays to dismiss the appeal.

¶46

5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11625 MFA No. 100340 of 2014

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

Perused the records, and considered the

¶49

submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The point that arises for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation.

¶50

There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of accident, and injuries sustained by the petitioner in the road traffic accident. The petitioner has produced the wound certificate marked as Ex.P6, which discloses that the petitioner sustained a lacerated wound measuring 2 x 1 cm, over the right side of the forehead, besides abrasion injury measuring 1 x 1 cm, upon the right cheek of the minor petitioner, and two teethes were found missing. The Doctor has opined that the breaking of teeth was grievous in nature. The petitioner was admitted as an impatient to the hospital from 04.10.2011 to 06.10.2011. Considering the wound certificate marked as Ex.P6, and also the discharge summary marked as Ex.P9, which discloses that the petitioner has suffered grievous injuries, it is evident that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower

¶51

6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:11625 MFA No. 100340 of 2014

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

side. This Court reassesses the compensation under the

¶54

following heads:

¶55

Sl.No.	Heads	Amount in (Rs.)
1	Towards pain and suffering	25,000/-
2	Towards medical expenses	4,500/-
3	Towards conveyance charges	1,000/-
4	Towards Loss of amenities	20,000/-
	Total:	50,500/-

¶56

Thus, the petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.50,500/as against Rs.10,500/awarded by the tribunal, i.e., an enhanced compensation of Rs. 40,000/-.

¶57

In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order:

¶58

ORDER

¶59

(i) The Appeal is allowed in part .

¶60

(ii) The Judgment and award dated 18.02.2013

¶61

passed in MVC No.37/2012 by the learned 2^nd Addl. M.A.C.T., Karwar, stands modified.

¶62

7 -

¶63

NC: 2025:KHC-D:11625 MFA No. 100340 of 2014

¶64

HC-KAR

¶65

(iii) Thus, the petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.50,500/as against Rs.10,500/- awarded by the tribunal. The petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.40,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of realisation of amount.

¶66

(iv) The respondents are directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.

¶67

Sd/(ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE

¶68

RHR/- CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24

Sagar S/O Ramakant Padti v. the Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sagar S/O Ramakant Padti v. the Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Girish S/O Irappa Pattanshetti Vs Shri Vishwanath S/O Shivappa Pattanshetti

Shri.Ramachandra S/O Giriyappa Aralikatti, Vs Shri.Shrinivas Veeranna Komar

Prithvisingh Narayansingh Raput Vs Sunita D/O Tesingh Raput

Shiva S/O Govind Naik, Vs Hindustan Unilever Ltd.

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Mohammed S/O Shahajan Shaikh

Yallappa S/O Ishwarappa Belagali Vs Smt. Mahananda W/O Beerappa Banahatti