- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24010 MFA No. 1418 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1418 OF 2017 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI SIDDALINGA SWAMY, AGED ABOUT 2 YEARS, S/O ANANDAPPA, R/AT 111, DASARAHALLI VILLAGE, TALAKU HOBLI, OBALAPURA POST, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, (PETITIONER SUSTAINED SEVER HEAD INJURY HENCE REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER SRI ANANDAPPA AS GUARDIAN). APPELLANT (BY SRI. NR RANGE GOWDA.,ADVOCATE) AND: THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, DOUBLE ROAD, SHANTHI NAGAR, BANGALORE. RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M ASHOK KUMAR.,ADVOCATE) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.07.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.1501/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, & XXXIV ACMM, MEMBER, MACT-7, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC,. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24010 MFA No. 1418 of 2017 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed by the claimant under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 19881 challenging the judgment and award dated 15.07.2016 passed in MVC.No.1501/2015 by the IX Additional Small Causes and Additional MACT, Bangalore (SCCH-7)2, seeking for enhancement of compensation. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein are referred as per their rank before the Tribunal. 3. The Tribunal vide its judgment and award dated 15.07.2016 has partly allowed the claim petition and has awarded a total compensation of `11,16,278/- together with interest at 8% per annum. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed by the claimant seeking for enhancement of compensation. 4. The findings of the Tribunal on negligence and liability are not under challenge and have attained finality. 1 Hereinafter referred as to ‘Act’ 2 Hereinafter referred as to ‘Tribunal’ - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24010 MFA No. 1418 of 2017 Hence, the only aspect that is required to be considered in the present appeal is with regard to the adequacy of the quantum of compensation awarded. 5. Heard submissions of learned counsel Sri NR Range Gowda appearing for the appellant – claimant and learned counsel Sri M Ashok Kumar appearing for the respondent – insurer. 6. It is forthcoming that the claimant was aged 22 years as on date of the accident i.e., on 12.12.2014. The Tribunal has applied the appropriate multiplier of ‘18’. 7. It is averred that the claimant was an employee in a private company and that he was earning `10,000/- per month. However, the father of the claimant was examined as PW.1 who has stated in his testimony that the claimant was earning `7,000/- per month and has admitted the same in his cross- examination also. Hence, the Tribunal has assessed the income at `7,000 per month which is just and proper. 8. It is forthcoming from the wound certificate (Ex.P6) and other medical evidence on record that the claimant has sustained head injuries with respiratory failure, fracture of the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24010 MFA No. 1418 of 2017 left occipital bone and subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) in frontal area. The claimant was treated as an inpatient on various dates for a total period of sixteen days. It is evident from the testimony of the doctor (PW2), as well as the permanent disability certificate (Ex.P17) and the neuropsychological assessment (Ex.P18), that the doctor has assessed the disability of the claimant at 50%. However, it is forthcoming from the cross-examination of PW.2 that he was not the doctor who treated the claimant. The PW.2 has further admitted that he assessed the disability of the claimant after one year and one month of the accident and that rehabilitation course was required to be taken which improves the physical and mental condition. Ex.P.18 has been conducted by another doctor. PW.2 has not conducted any tests to assess the neurological disability of the claimant. Considering the said aspects, the Tribunal has re-assessed the disability at 50% which is just and proper. 9. However, having regard to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of SIDRAM V/S UNITED - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24010 MFA No. 1418 of 2017 INDIA INSURANCE COM. LTD3, since the disability is assessed as 50%, it is just and proper that the future prospects be considered while assessing the compensation of loss of disability / future earning capacity. 10. Having regard to the aforementioned, the compensation is re-assessed as follows: i. Having regard to nature of injuries sustained, the compensation towards pain and suffering is re-assessed as `60,000/- as against `50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. ii. Having regard to nature of injuries sustained and the resultant disability, the compensation towards loss of amenities is re-assessed as `40,000/- as against `30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. iii. The compensation towards loss of marriage prospects, loss of income during laid up period and future medical expenses awarded by the Tribunal are just in proper. 3 “(2023)3 SCC 439” - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24010 MFA No. 1418 of 2017 iv. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of `1,97,278/- towards medical expenses which is as per the actual bills which is just and proper and rounded off as `2,00,000/-. v. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of `5,000/- towards conveyance, `5,000/- towards attendant charges and `5,000/- towards food, nourishment and diet charges. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the period of treatment it is just and proper, that the compensation on the said heads be re-assessed as `25,000/-. vi. The loss of future earning capacity / disability is re- assessed as (7000 + 40% X 12 X 18 X 50%)=`10,58,400/- as against `7,56,200/- awarded by the Tribunal. 11. Taking judicial notice of the rate of interest awarded towards fixed deposits, interest on the enhanced compensation is awarded as 7% pa as against 8% awarded by the Tribunal. 12. In view of the aforementioned, the compensation re-assessed is as follows: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24010 MFA No. 1418 of 2017 Sl.No Compensation Head Amount Awarded by the Tribunal (`) Amount awarded by this Court (`) 1 Loss of future earning capacity 756200.00 1058400.00 2 Pain and suffering 50000.00 60000.00 3 Loss of amenities 30000.00 40000.00 4 Loss of marriage prospects 20000.00 20000.00 5 Loss of income during laid up period 28000.00 28000.00 6 Actual medical expenses 197278.00 200000.00 7 Future medical expenses 20000.00 20000.00 8 Food, nourishment, diet, conveyance and attendant charges 15000.00 25000.00 Total (Wrongly calculated by the Tribunal) 1116478.00 (1116278.00) 1451400.00 13. Accordingly, the Claimant is entitled to a enhanced compensation of (`14,51,400/- - `11,16,478/-)= `3,34,922/-. 14. In view of the aforementioned, the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part; - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24010 MFA No. 1418 of 2017 ii) The judgment and award dated 15.07.2016 passed in MVC.No.1501/2015 by the IX Additional Small Causes and Additional MACT, Bangalore (SCCH-7), is hereby modified to the extent stated herein. In all other respects, the judgment and award of the Tribunal remains unaltered; iii) The appellants/claimants are entitled to an enhanced compensation of `3,34,922/- together with interest at 7% per annum from the date of petition till its realization in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal; iv) Respondent No.1 shall deposit the said compensation together with accrued interest within a period of six weeks; v) Upon such deposit, the entire enhanced compensation together with interest accrued thereupon be disbursed to the claimant; vi) The Registry to draw the modified award accordingly; vii) Records be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. No costs. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE PNV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 79