- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:17191 MFA No. 1632 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1632 OF 2024 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI SHIVAPPA D., S/O BORE GOWDA, AGED 35 YEARS, R/AT: GOWDAHALLI VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. NITHYA V., ADVOCATE FOR SRI PRAKASH M.H., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRIRAM GEN. INS. CO. LTD., OFFICE AT NO.48, 3RD FLOOR, SS CORNER BUILDING, HOSPITAL ROAD, NEXT TO KAMATH HOTEL, SHIVAJINAGARA, BANGALORE - 560 001, REP. BY ITS MANAGER. 2. SRI DODDAIAH, S/O RUDRAIAH, MAJOR, R/A LAKSHMIPURA VILLAGE, KANAKAPRUA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PRADEEP B., ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 13.11.2024, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.12.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO.687/2022 BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU. Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:17191 MFA No. 1632 of 2024 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award dated 12.12.2023 passed in MVC.dNo.687/2022 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation. 2. It is the case of the claimant that he had sustained injuries in the road traffic accident dated 01.08.2021 and the Tribunal had granted an amount of Rs.11,28,506/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-claimant submits that the Tribunal had taken the income at Rs.12,882/-, but, it ought to have been taken the income at Rs.15,000/- as income. It is submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other conventional heads is on the lower side and the amount needs to be enhanced. 4. Learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company submits that the limb disability is at 45.69%, which comes to 15.23% to the whole body, but the Tribunal has assessed the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:17191 MFA No. 1632 of 2024 disability at 25% to the whole body, which is on the higher side. It is submitted that if it is calculated at 15.23% to the whole body, already the amount was granted by the Tribunal is on the higher side and the claimant is not entitled for enhancement of compensation. 5. Heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. As rightly argued by the learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company in the limb disability is at 45.69%, then in that case the whole body disability will come to 15.23%. But, the Tribunal has already taken the disability at 25% and granted the compensation. In that view of the matter, there are no ground for enhancement of the compensation. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE CPN CT: BHK