Sri. Krishna Murthy Vs Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd.

SRI. KRISHNA MURTHY S/O. LATE GOPALLAPPA AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS WORKING AS "SECOND DIVISION ASSISTANT" IN HOPCOMS UNIT AT KAIVARA RESIDING AT THALAGAVARA CHINTAMANI TALUK CHICKABALLAPUR DISTRICT.

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI T.A. RAMAKRISHNAPPA, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by MOUNESHWARAPPA NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. LOCAL OFFICE AT NO.1/2 4^TH FLOOR, NEAR SUJATHA THEATRE 59^TH 'C' CROSS, 4^TH BLOCK RAJAJINAGAR BENGALURU-560 010 REPRESENTED BY ITS CLAIMS LEGAL HUB MANAGER SRI KRISHNA SHEERNALLI BENGALURU CITY.

¶16

2 -

¶17

NC: 2025:KHC:33655-DB MFA No. 3153 of 2017

¶18

HC-KAR

¶19

MR. JIBU JACOB S/O. M. JACOB KUNJUKUNJU AGE: MAJOR RESIDING AT NO.15, 1ST FLOOR D#1, 3RD CROSS LAKSHMINARAYANAPURA OPP: VAIKUNTOM APTS. AECS LAYOUT, KUNDALAHALLI GATE BENGALURU-560 037.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE, FOR R-2, AND VIDE ORDER DATED 20-6-2025, NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶22

¶23

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE M.V. ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27-5-2016 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.2016 OF 2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND MEMBER, M.A.C.T., BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶24

THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶26

3 -

¶27

NC: 2025:KHC:33655-DB MFA No. 3153 of 2017

¶28

HC-KAR

¶29

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶30

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T.)

¶31

This appeal is filed by the claimant-injured challenging the judgment and award dated 27-5-2016 passed in M.V.C. No.2016 of 2015 on the file of the learned XIII Additional Small Cause Judge and Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru, whereby, the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.5,60,250/- (deducting 25% contributory negligence on Rs.7,47,000/-) with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till realisation.

¶32

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.

¶33

Brief facts of the case are that on 5-10-2014 at 11:40 a.m., when Sri Krishnamurthy, being a pillion rider, was proceeding on a motorcycle, bearing Registration No.KA-40 K-4055, near MVIT Junction, Devanahalli towards Yelahanka, Bengaluru, the driver of a car, bearing Registration No.KA-03 MR-0398, drove it in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle of the claimant, as a result, the rider and the claimant sustained grievous injuries. Hence,

¶34

4 -

¶35

NC: 2025:KHC:33655-DB MFA No. 3153 of 2017

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

the claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the Tribunal seeking compensation.

¶38

Heard Sri T.A. Ramakrishnappa, learned counsel for the appellant/claimant, and Sri B. Pradeep, learned counsel for respondent No.1/Insurance Company.

¶39

Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant has contended that the Tribunal has wrongly saddled 25% of contributory negligence on the rider of the motorcycle. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the appeals filed by the Insurance Company and the claimants of the deceased rider in M.F.A. No.7505 of 2016 (MV-D) connected with M.F.A. Cross Objection No.15 of 2017 (MV-D), by judgment 19-3-2021, has set aside the negligence on the part of the rider of the motorcycle and hence, he prays to consider the same in this appeal. He submits that the Doctor has assessed the permanent physical impairment to the whole body at 26%, but the Tribunal has considered it at 20%. He further submits that the compensation awarded on conventional heads is on lower

¶40

side. Hence, on all these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal.

¶41

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:33655-DB MFA No. 3153 of 2017

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

Per contra , the learned counsel for respondent No.1Insurance Company, supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded just and reasonable compensation under each heads, which does not call for interference at the hands of this Court. Thus, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.

¶44

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the appeal papers including original records of the Tribunal, the following point would arise for our consideration in this appeal:

¶45

Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?

¶46

In the instant case, the learned counsel for the claimant has taken the contention that the Tribunal has wrongly saddled 25% of contributory negligence on the deceased rider of the motorcycle. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the appeals filed by the Insurance Company and the claimants of the deceased rider in M.F.A. No.7505 of 2016

¶47

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:33655-DB MFA No. 3153 of 2017

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

(MV-D) connected with M.F.A. Cross Objection No.15 of 2017 (MV-D), after thorough analysis, by judgment dated 19-3-2021, has held that 'the finding of the Tribunal that the deceased (rider) was also negligent in causing of the accident to the extent of 25% is set aside and it is held that the accident wholly occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.' Since the claimant was a pillion rider, the same ratio is applicable in this appeal.

¶50

In so far as disability is concerned, the claimant suffered fracture of shaft segmental left femur; left medial malleolus fracture left humerus shaft fracture (middle and distal 1/3^rd junction) with radial nerve palsy (neuropraxia) with head injury. PW3-Dr. Krishnaprasad, in his evidence, has stated that the claimant is having permanent physical impairment to both the left upper limb and lower limb respectively at 59% and 54% which comes to the whole body at 26%. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.80,000/- towards 'permanent physical impairment' and Rs.60,000/- towards 'loss of amenities and comfort'. Considering the nature of injuries and discomfort, we enhance Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.50,000/- under the said heads, respectively.

¶51

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:33655-DB MFA No. 3153 of 2017

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

Further, the Tribunal awarded Rs.60,000/- towards 'pain and sufferings', Rs.20,000/- towards 'loss of income during laid-up period, Rs.20,000/- towards 'attendant charges, food and nourishment', Rs.4,87,000/towards 'medical expenses' and Rs.20,000/towards 'future medical expenditure', same are maintained.

¶54

Thus, the appellant/claimant is entitled for the

¶55

following compensation:

¶56

HEADS	Rs.
Pain and sufferings	60,000.00
Loss of income during laid-up period	20,000.00
Attendant charges, food and nourishment	20,000.00
Medical expenses	4,87,000.00
Future medical treatment	20,000.00
Loss of amenities (Rs.60,000/- awarded
by the Tribunal and Rs.50,000/- awarded by this Court)	1,10,000.00
Permanent physical impairment (Rs.80,000/- awarded by the Tribunal and Rs.1,00,000/- awarded by this Court)	1,80,000.00
TOTAL	8,97,000.00
Less: Compensation awarded by the Tribunal(100%)	7,47,000.00
ENHANCED COMPENSATION	1,50,000.00

¶57

In the result, we pass the following:

¶58

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:33655-DB MFA No. 3153 of 2017

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

O R D E R

¶61

i. The appeal is allowed-in-part .

¶62

ii. The finding of the Tribunal that the deceased rider was also negligent in causing of the accident to an extent of 25% is set aside.

¶63

iii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated hereinabove. The appellant/claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.8,97,000/- as against Rs.7,47,000/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of its realisation, excluding interest for the period between 28-1-2021 and 14-7-2025, as per the Order dated 14-7-2025.

¶64

iv. Respondent No.1-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount together with interest within a period of six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶65