- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1476 MFA No. 201498 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. JOSHI MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201498/2021(MV-I) BETWEEN: NAGURAO S/O HACHHU RATHOD, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: MAKADMA (CONTRACTOR), R/O INDRA NAGAR, VIJAYAPURA-586 101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BASAVARAJ M. BENNUR @ BEVANUR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O TEGGIHALLI, TQ. INDI, DIST. VIJAYAPURA-586 101. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., HEARALAGI BUILDING, BEHIND SIDDESHWAR TEMPLE, VIJAYAPURA-586 101. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., SANGAM BUILDING, PB. NO.60, SHIVALEELA DATTATRAYA UDAGI Digitally signed by SHIVALEELA DATTATRAYA UDAGI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA Date: 2025.03.19 12:03:28 -0700 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1476 MFA No. 201498 of 2021 S.S. FRONT ROAD, VIJAYAPURA-586 101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHARANABASAPPA M. PATIL, ADV. FOR R2; SRI. RAHUL R. ASTURE, ADV. FOR R3; V/O DTD. 06.01.2022, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT PAYABLE TO THE APPELLANT BY SUITABLY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.09.2018 PASSED BY THE COURT OF I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.VI, VIJAYAPUR IN MVC NO.1138/2014. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. JOSHI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. JOSHI) By consent of learned counsel appearing for the appellant and respondent No.2, the matter is taken up for final disposal even though it is listed for admission. 2. Being aggrieved by the judgment and award in MVC No.1138/2014 by the learned I Additional Senior Civil - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1476 MFA No. 201498 of 2021 Judge and MACT-VI, Vijayapur the petitioner is before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. The factual matrix of the case is that on 11.04.2013, the petitioner was traveling in a KSRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-28/F-1290 from Indi to Sindagi and a tractor-trailer unit bearing KA-28/M-5506 came from opposite side and dashed to KSRTC bus. The petitioner sustained grievous injuries and he was shifted to Civil Hospital, Sindagi and thereafter to Government Hospital at Vijayapur. He was inpatient for 11 days and later he filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation from the owner and insurer of the tractor-trailer unit. Respondent No.3 is the insurer of the trolley. 4. The petitioner contended that he was aged 40 years, working as a Macadam (Contract) with a contractor earning Rs.10,000/- p.m., and due to the accident he has suffered permanent disability. 5. On being served with the notice, the respondents appeared before the Tribunal and resisted the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1476 MFA No. 201498 of 2021 claim petition. Respondent No.1 alleged that the accident was due to the negligence of driver of the bus and there was no such negligence on behalf of the driver of tractor- trailer and as such, he is not liable to pay the compensation. However, there being a policy and a valid driving licence, compensation to be paid if any, the same be fastened upon respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 inter alia took up similar contention and alleged that the compensation claimed is highly exorbitant and imaginary. 6. The respondent No.3 contended that the trolley independently does not have any motor power and therefore, it is not liable to pay any compensation. 7. The Tribunal framed appropriate issues and the petitioner was examined as PW.1 and Doctor who was assessed the disability was examined as PW.2. Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.12 were marked. No documents were marked on behalf of respondents. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1476 MFA No. 201498 of 2021 8. After hearing the arguments, the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,93,000/- on the following heads : Sl.No. Heads Compensation 1. Pain and sufferings 25,000/- 2. Medical expenses 45,000/- 3. Loss of earning during laid up period 2,200/- 4. Loss of future earning on account of permanent disability 93,600/- 5. Loss of amenities and future unhappiness 25,000/- 6. Attendant, diet, conveyance and other charges 2,200/- Total 1,93,000/- 9. The petition as against respondent No.3 came to be dismissed. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that though the Tribunal comes to the conclusion that there is a functional disability of 20%, without assigning any reason it reduces the same to 10% while calculating future loss of income. He points out that the petitioner had sustained compound type-III fracture of the tibial condyle with de-gloving injury on the lateral aspect - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1476 MFA No. 201498 of 2021 of the leg, posterior fracture and dislocation of the right hip. When he had suffered injuries to both the lower limbs, the disability assessed by PW.2 at 42% to 45% should have been considered appropriately by the Tribunal. Even though the Tribunal holds that the functional disability is 20%, in para 19, without assigning any reason it calculates the compensation by adopting the disability of 10%. He also submits that the compensation under the remaining heads needs enhancement since the notional income considered by the Tribunal is on the lower side. 11. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 submits that the assessment of the compensation by the Tribunal is appropriate and do not require any indulgence by this Court. 12. Having considered the above submissions, a perusal of Para Nos.14 and 19 would indicate that PW2 had stated that there is disability of 25 to 30%. The certified copy of the deposition of PW2 is made available to - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1476 MFA No. 201498 of 2021 this Court along with the Disability Certificate at Ex.P12, which would show that there is disability of 25 to 30% only to the right lower limb. PW2 had not stated anything about the disability to the left lower limb. In that view of the matter, the disability assessed by the Tribunal is correct. Therefore, there is no need for enhancement of the disability. 13. Insofar as the notional income is concerned, there being no acceptable evidence in respect of the income of the petitioner, the adoption of the notional income by the Tribunal is correct, but the income assessed at Rs.6,000/- per month appears to be on the lower side. The guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (KSLSA) for settlement of the disputes before the Lok Adalat prescribes the notional income of Rs.7,000/- per month for the year 2013. In umpteen numbers of decisions, this Court has held that the guidelines issued by KSLSA are held to be acceptable on the ground that they are in general conformity with the - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1476 MFA No. 201498 of 2021 minimum wages fixed under the Minimum Wages Act. Therefore, the notional income of the petitioner is accepted as Rs.7,000/- per month and the loss of future income due to disability is calculated as Rs.7000/- x 12 x 13 x 10% = Rs.1,09,200/-. 14. The compensation awarded under the head pain and sufferings to the tune of Rs.25,000/- needs to be enhanced to Rs.50,000/-. 15. The petitioner being 50 years and being Macadam, it can safely said that he was unable to do his work for a period of four months. Hence, under the head loss of income during laid up period is calculated for four months, which comes to Rs.7,000/- x 4 = Rs.28,000/-. 16. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.25,000/- under the head loss of amenities in life and the same is enhanced to Rs.40,000/-. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1476 MFA No. 201498 of 2021 17. The petitioner being inpatient for 11 days, the compensation awarded under the head attendant’s and conveyance charges etc., is enhanced to Rs.5,000/-. 18. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under remaining heads does not require any indulgence by this Court. Accordingly, the appellant-petitioner is entitled for total compensation of Rs.2,77,200/- as under: Sl. No. Heads Award by the Tribunal Award by this Court 1 Pain and sufferings Rs.25,000/- Rs.50,000/- 2 Medical expenses Rs.45,000/- Rs.45,000/- 3 Loss of income due to permanent physical disability Rs.93,600/- Rs.1,09,200/- 4 Attendant, diet conveyance and other charges Rs.2,200/- Rs.5,000/- 5 Loss of amenities in life Rs.25,000/- Rs.40,000/- 6 Loss of income during laid up period Rs.2,200/- Rs.28,000/- Total Rs.1,93,000/- Rs.2,77,200/- Less: Award by the Tribunal Rs.1,93,000/- Total enhancement Rs.84,200/- - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:1476 MFA No. 201498 of 2021 19. In the result, the appeal deserves to be allowed and hence, the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is hereby modified. (iii) The appellant is entitled for a sum of Rs.84,200/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. (iv) The respondent No.2 – Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation along with interest within a period of 06 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- (C.M. JOSHI) JUDGE SN, SBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 38 CT: AK