SRI. G. T. SOMAIAH vs THE MANAGER IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 30 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3990 OF 2023(MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI. G. T. SOMAIAH,
S/O G.B.THIMMAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/A NO.5, SHREE KAVERI,
IST MAIN, 2ND CROSS,
KEMPAIAH NAGARA,
HURALICHIKKANAHALLI,
CHIKKABANAVARA,
BENGALURU - 560 090.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI NAIK KRISHNA VENKATRAMAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGER,
IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED,
NO.3, KSCMF BUILDING,
3RD FLOOR, CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 052.
POLICY ISSUED BY ITS
OFFICE IN POLICY NO.1-169HMZ4C P400
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
#M9092111,
DATE OF VALIDITY FROM 22.02.2021 TO
21.02.2022.
2. SRI. NAGESH S,
S/O SRINIVASA V,
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
R/A NO.5, 6TH CROSS,
MUNESHWARA LAYOUT,
ATTUR POST, YELAHANKA,
BENGALURU - 560 064.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.ANAVEKAR ROOPA RAM, ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. SANMATHI E.I., ADVOCATE;
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED
15.07.2026)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.02.2023 PASSED IN MVC
NO.5256/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL SCJ AND
ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU SCCH-5, 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 MRS. JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. This is the appeal filed under Section 173(1) of
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short, 'MV Act') by the
appellant/claimant challenging the judgment and award
dated 01.02.2023 in MVC No.5256/2021 on the file of the
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
VIII Additional Small Causes Judge and the Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal (SCCH-5), Bengaluru (in short, 'the
Tribunal') being not satisfied with the quantum of
compensation awarded by the Tribunal and fastening
negligence on him.
2. The parties would be referred with their ranks,
as they were before the Tribunal for the sake of
convenience and clarity.
3. The case of the claimant in nutshell is that on
30.09.2021 at 11:45 p.m., when the claimant was
crossing the road at Allalasandra Royal Archid, Yelahanka,
he got down from Hoysala 205 and waiting to cross the
road to attend his nature call; at that time, the offending
motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-50/ED-1966 came
with high speed rashly and negligently and dashed against
him. Hence, he has suffered grievous injuries. He has
taken treatment at Hosmat Hospital, Bengaluru. Hence,
claimed compensation from respondents No.1 and 2 who
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
are the Insurance Company and owner respectively of the
offending motorcycle.
4. After service of notice, respondent No.1/
Insurance Company filed its objection statement denying
the averments made in the petition and further contended
that the accident happened due to the rash and negligent
act of the claimant and not due to the rider of the
motorcycle. Further, rider of motorcycle was not having
driving license. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the petition.
5. After framing issues, recording evidence, the
Tribunal came to the conclusion that there is 20%
contributory negligence on the part of claimant in causing
the accident. It further directed the insurance Company to
pay the compensation initially and recover the same from
the owner, as the driver was not holding valid and
effective driving license; further held that the claimant is
entitled for 80% of total compensation of ` 1,01,423/-
under the following heads:
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
1 Pain and sufferings ` 15000/-
Conveyance, nourishment and
2
` 15000/-
attendant charges
3 Medical expenses ` 15,423/-
4 Loss of amenities in life ` 15,000/-
Loss of income during laid up
5
` 41,000/-
period
Total ` 1,01,423/-
6. Not satisfied with the compensation awarded by
the Tribunal, and challenging the contributory negligence
attributed against the claimant, he is before this Court.
7. Heard arguments of both sides.
8. The learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Naik
Krishna Venkataraman would submit that the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal on all heads is on
lower side compared to the injuries sustained by the
claimant and the period of his hospitalization and the
period of his leave. Furthermore, 20% negligence
contributed against the claimant by the Tribunal is not
proper and hence prayed for allowing the appeal.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
9. The learned counsel for respondent No.1/
insurance Company Smt. Anavekar Roopa Ram for Sri
Sanmathi E.I. appeared through V.C. and would submit
that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal on all
heads is just and reasonable. Furthermore, there is
contributory negligence on the part of the claimant in
causing the accident, which is established by police papers
and the cross-examination of the claimant. Hence, it
requires no interference.
10. Having heard arguments of both sides, verifying
the appeal papers and trial Court records, the points that
arise for consideration are:
i. "Whether the appellant establishes that there
is no contributory negligence on his part in
causing the accident?
ii. Whether the claimant is entitled for
enhancement of compensation?"
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
11. Findings of this Court on the above point No.1
is in 'Negative' and point No.2 is in 'Affirmative' for the
following:
REASONS
12. The claimant has sustained injury in the road
traffic accident that has taken place on 30.09.2021 at
11:45 p.m. on the road leading to Allalasandra Royal
Archid, Yelahanka, Bengaluru is established by the oral
and documentary evidence produced before the trial
Court.
13. Ex.P.4-sketch, Ex.P.5-panchanama, the
complaint and further statement of the complainant as per
Ex.P.2 and P.3 reveals that the claimant was working as
police constable-cum-driver of the Hoysala vehicle and on
the date of accident he got down from the vehicle to
attend the nature call and while crossing the road he
sustained injuries. It is stated so in the complaint and also
in the further statement of the complainant. The accident
has taken place on the road i.e., 5 feet from left side.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
Furthermore, the accident occurred during night at 11:45
pm. These facts establish that there is contributory
negligence on the part of claimant in causing the accident.
It is assessed at 20% by the Tribunal, which is proper and
required no interference.
14. The doctor has issued the disability Certificate
and has given evidence that the claimant has sustained
disability of 58% to the right lower limb and 19% to the
whole body. However, the claimant has not produced any
evidence to show that because of his disability, he left the
job or his promotional aspects were reduced and he was
posted to some other branch in the police department. In
the absence of these things, the Trial Court rightly held
that the disability to the claimant cannot be considered as
functional disability.
15. Ex.P.15 produced by the claimant establishes
that the claimant has taken totally 264 days leave i.e.,
including commuted leave and earned leave due to the
accident.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
16. It is to be noted that even though the claimant
was getting salary during that period, the claimant could
have encashed these 264 days leave during the intervals
of his service or at the time of his retirement. Hence, the
claimant has lost his income of 264 days due to the
accident. However, the Tribunal has awarded only
` 41,000/- towards 'loss of income during the laid-off
period' which is not proper. The claimant has deposed that
he was getting salary of ` 41,000/- per month. However,
to substantiate it, he has not produced his pay slip. Even
though his pay slip is not produced, it is not in dispute that
he was working as police constable in police department
as on the date of accident. The basic salary to police
constable is 27,000/- and relevant DA for said period was
17%. Hence, his income shall be taken at ` 31,590/- and
`
the claimant is entitled for 31,590/- ÷ 30 x 264 days =
`
2,77,992/-. Thus, the claimant is entitled for the said
amount under the head 'loss of income during the laid-off
period'.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
17. As far as 'pain and sufferings' and 'loss of
amenities' are concerned, the compensation awarded by
the Tribunal is on lower side; hence, the claimant is
entitled for ` 1,00,000/- and ` 50,000/- respectively under
these heads. As far as compensation awarded by the
Tribunal under the head 'Conveyance, nourishment and
attendant charges' and 'Medical expenses' is just and
reasonable and requires no interference.
18. Thus, the claimant is entitled for compensation
under following heads:
1 Pain and sufferings ` 1,00,000/-
Conveyance, nourishment and
2
` 15,000/-
attendant charges
3 Medical expenses ` 15,423/-
4 Loss of amenities ` 50,000/-
Loss of income during laid-off
5
` 2,77,992/-
period
` 4,58,415/-
Total
minus 20% =
` 3,66,732/-
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
19. Hence, this Court passes the following:
ORDER
a. The appeal filed under Section 173(1) of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is allowed in part .
b. The Judgment and award dated 01.02.2023
passed in MVC No.5256/2021 on the file of
the VIII Additional Small Causes Judge and
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (SCCH-5),
Bengaluru is modified holding that the
claimant is entitled for total compensation of
` `
3,66,732/- (80% of 4,58,415/-) as against
80% of ` 1,01,423/- awarded by the Tribunal.
c. The insurance Company is directed initially to
pay the same and recover the same through
the owner.
d. The enhanced compensation shall carry
interest at 6% per annum from the date of
petition till realization.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
- 12 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60888
MFA No. 3990 of 2023
CNR: KAHC010289912023
e. The respondent No.1-insurance Company
shall deposit the compensation amount with
accrued interest before the Tribunal within a
period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this judgment.
f. The disbursement and deposit shall be as per
the order of the Tribunal.
g. No Order as to costs.
h. Draw modified award accordingly.
i. Registry to transmit the TCR to the Tribunal
forthwith.
Digitally Signed By:
K B GEETHA
(GEETHA K.B.)
JUDGE
LL
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21