Karnataka High Court
Transport, Maritime, and Aviation LawCivil Law

A passenger falling when a bus moves suddenly while she alights is not contributorily negligent.

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, B.M.T.C. vs NANDINI R

Karnataka High CourtJUDGMENT: September 22, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
A passenger falling when a bus moves suddenly while she alights is not contributorily negligent.. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, B.M.T.C. vs NANDINI R. Karnataka High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The claimant sought compensation for injuries sustained when she fell while alighting from a BMTC bus that allegedly moved suddenly before its door was closed.

Source reference: no citation

The Tribunal found the bus driver solely negligent and awarded ₹10,83,540 with interest at 6% per annum.

Source reference: no citation

BMTC appealed, challenging negligence, the disability and income assessments, and several compensation heads.

Source reference: no citation

The judgment gives inconsistent accident dates: 10 August 2014 in the claim summary and 10 August 2024 in its discussion of negligence.

Source reference: p. 2, 6
02

Issues

1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in finding that the accident occurred solely due to the bus driver’s negligence

Source reference: p. 6, para. 10

2. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal was excessive and required reassessment

Source reference: p. 6, para. 10
03

Law Applied

The appeal was brought under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which provides for an appeal against a Tribunal’s award.

Source reference: p. 1

The Court applied the principles of assessing accident compensation by reference to proved injuries, disability, income, age, and the appropriate multiplier.

Source reference: no citation

It also applied the stated principle that, in an appeal brought by a corporation or insurer, compensation may be reassessed but should not exceed the Tribunal’s total award.

Source reference: p. 9, para. 16

No specific precedent was cited.

Source reference: no citation
04

Reasoning

The Court upheld the negligence finding because the claimant fell as the bus moved while she was getting down, and the charge sheet alleged rash and negligent driving; it found no basis to attribute contributory negligence to her.

Source reference: p. 7, para. 11

It accepted the 26% whole-body disability assessment, but corrected the monthly income to ₹8,500, the amount stated by the Tribunal, rather than ₹14,000, and calculated future loss of income using 40% future prospects and a multiplier of 18.

Source reference: pp. 8–9, paras. 13–15

It increased compensation for pain and suffering, loss of amenities, and laid-up-period income, but disallowed future medical expenses for lack of a supporting finding and excluded ₹52,105 in bills because the claimant had not established treatment at People Tree Hospital.

Source reference: pp. 9–11, paras. 16–20
05

Holding

The Court answered the negligence issue in favour of the claimant and partly allowed BMTC’s appeal.

It reduced the total award to ₹9,38,526, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition until realisation.

Source reference: pp. 12–13, paras. 21–23

BMTC was directed to deposit the compensation, including interest and accounting for any amount already deposited, within six weeks; the Tribunal’s directions on release and deposit otherwise remained unchanged.

Source reference: pp. 12–13, paras. 21–23
06

Acts & Sections Cited

1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Motor Vehicles Act, 19881

Karnataka High Court

Original Court PDF

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, B.M.T.C.vsNANDINI R

Karnataka High Court · September 22, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment