- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3649 MFA No. 201917 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 201917 OF 2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: INDRAMMA W/O DURGAPPA DEVAKAR, AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE & AGRICULTURE, R/O: HONAGERA, TQ: & DIST: YADGIRI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SHARANABASSAPPA K.BABSHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHREE RAMAREDDY S/O BASAVARAJAPPA HALIMANI, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, & OWNER OF TRACTOR, R/O: MALLHARA VILLAGE, TQ: & DIST: YADGIRI – 585 201. 2. MALLAPPA S/O MAREPPA, AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE & OWNER OF TROLLEY, R/O: HONAGERA, TQ: & DIST: YADGIRI – 585 201. 3. THE GENERAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., DR. JAVALI COMPLEX, SUPER MARKET, KALABURAGI – 585 101. Digitally signed by NIJAMUDDIN JAMKHANDI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3649 MFA No. 201917 of 2019 4. THE GENERAL MANAGER, UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., KVD TOWERS, 7/3, 2ND FLOOR, ABUVA BARAKLASS FINANCE, 100 FT. ROAD, OPP: OLD MADRAS ROAD, INDIRA NAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 038. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.S.ASPALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R3; SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R4; NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.12.2018 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT YADGIR, IN MVC NO.274/2014 AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI ORAL JUDGMENT Challenging judgment and award dated 05.12.2018 passed by Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Yadgir, in MVC no.274/2014, this appeal is filed. 2. Sri Sharanabasappa K.Babshetty, learned counsel submitted appeal was by claimant for enhancement of compensation. It was submitted at about 11.00 a.m. on 25.11.2013, claimant was riding pillion on motorcycle, when driver of tractor no.KA-33/T-4768 and trailer no.KA-33/TA- - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3649 MFA No. 201917 of 2019 3216, drove it in rash and negligent manner and dashed against motorcycle causing accident. In said accident, claimant sustained grievous injuries. Despite taking treatment, she did not recover fully and sustained permanent physical disability/loss of earning capacity. Therefore, she filed claim petition under Section 166 of M.V.Act, against owners and insurer of tractor and trailer respectively. 3. On contest, wherein claim petition was opposed denying age, occupation and disability sustained by claimant as well as alleging violation of policy conditions, tribunal framed issues and recorded evidence. Claimant examined herself and Dr.Neelakant Saidappa as PWs.1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.12. Respondents did not lead oral evidence but got marked driving licence endorsement with consent as Ex.R1. 4. On consideration, Tribunal held accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of tractor and trailer by its driver, claimant sustained permanent physical disability/loss of earning capacity and entitled for compensation. It was submitted, tribunal apportioned liability - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3649 MFA No. 201917 of 2019 between owner/insurer of tractor and trailer respectively at 50% each and assessed compensation as follows: Sl.No. Heads Amount 1 Loss of permanent disability Rs.1,16,640/- 2 Pain and suffering Rs.25,000/- 3 Medical expenses Rs.66,626/- 4 Loss of amenities Rs.20,000/- 5 Food and nourishment Rs.10,000/- 6 Conveyance Rs.10,000/- 7 Attendant charges Rs.2,100/- Total Rounded off Rs.2,52,466/- Rs.2,52,000/- 5. Dissatisfied with same, claimant was in appeal. 6. It was submitted that claimant was 23 years of age working as agricultural coolie and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. However, tribunal assessed it at Rs.4,500/- which was on lower side. It was submitted, when claimant sustained fracture of proximal humerus, award of Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering was on lower side. Likewise even award of Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities was on lower side. On said grounds sought enhancement. 7. On other hand, Smt.Preeti Patil Melkundi and Sri S.S. Aspalli, learned counsel for respondents no.3 and 4 - insurers opposed appeal. It was submitted that appeal by - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3649 MFA No. 201917 of 2019 insurer of trailer in MFA no.200936/2019 was dismissed. It was further submitted, tribunal had assessed just compensation under various heads separately leaving no scope for enhancement. 8. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned judgment and award. 9. As this appeal is by claimant for enhancement of compensation, only point that would arise for consideration is: “Whether claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation as prayed for? 10. Though claimant stated that she was agricultural coolie and earning Rs.10,000/- per month, same was not substantiated with specific evidence. In absence, tribunal was justified in assessing it notionally. But notional income for year 2013 as adopted by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority being Rs.7,000/-, it was not justified in taking at Rs.4,500/- per month. Therefore, Rs.7,000/- per month has to be considered as monthly income. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3649 MFA No. 201917 of 2019 11. Claimant sustained fracture of proximal humerus apart from other lacerated injuries. Normally, for one major fracture, Rs.25,000/- is awarded. Therefore award of Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering by tribunal would be just and proper. 12. PW.2 assessed permanent physical disability at 21%. Tribunal considered functional disability at 12% and awarded compensation. Perusal of Ex.P11 - disability certificate would reveal that there is no observation about restriction of movement of limb. Under such circumstances, assessment of disability at 12% would be just and proper. There is no dispute about multiplier applicable. Hence, loss of future income would be as follows: Rs.7,500/- x 12 x 18 x 12% = Rs.1,81,440/- 13. Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities. Considering disability caused, same would appear just and proper. Hence, no enhancement. 14. Normally, fractures take about three months to heal. Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3649 MFA No. 201917 of 2019 income during laid up period. Claimant would be entitled for Rs.21,000/- on said ground. 15. Tribunal has awarded Rs.66,626/- towards medical expenses against bills produced which is just and proper. Likewise, it has awarded Rs.10,000/- towards food and nourishment, Rs.10,000/- towards conveyance and Rs.2,100/- towards attendant charges for inpatient treatment for period of 14 days which is also just and proper. Thus, total compensation would be re-assessed as follows: Sl.No. Heads Amount 1 Loss of permanent disability Rs.1,81,440/- 2 Pain and suffering Rs.25,000/- 3 Medical expenses Rs.66,626/- 4 Loss of amenities Rs.20,000/- 5 Food and nourishment Rs.10,000/- 6 Conveyance Rs.10,000/- 7 Attendant charges Rs.2,100/- 8 Loss of income during laid up period Rs.21,000/- Total Rs. Rs. Rs. Rs.3,36,166/- 16. In view of above, point for consideration is answered partly in affirmative. Consequently, following: - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3649 MFA No. 201917 of 2019 ORDER i. Appeal is allowed in part. ii. Judgment and award dated 05.12.2018 passed by Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Yadgir, in MVC no.274/2014, is modified. iii. Claimant is held entitled for re-assessed compensation of Rs.3,36,166/- as against Rs.2,52,000/- awarded by Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from date of claim petition till deposit. iv. Respondent-insurer to deposit same before Tribunal within a period of six weeks. Sd/- (RAVI V HOSMANI) JUDGE MSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24 CT/VK