- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6429 OF 2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI D R VENKATESH S/O LATE RAMASWAMI REDDY, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT NO.1085/1, 19TH A MAIN ROAD, 1ST BLOCK, HRBR LAYOUT, BENGALURU NORTH, KALYANAGAR,BANGALORE-43 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V SHASTRI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI SHAIJU S S/O SHAJAHAN MAJOR, R/AT SHAIJU MANZIL, AMMAN NAGAR, 231, PATTATHANNAM P.O, KOLLAM-691021 KERALA STATE. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, KRISHIBHAVANA NO.18, 5TH FLOOR, BRUPATHUNGA ROAD, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560001 3. MOHAN KUMAR L S/O LAKSHMI NARASIMMAN, Digitally signed by BHARATHI S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 MAJOR, R/AT NO.8, HOUSE NO.6, 2ND FLOOR, 29TH B CROSS, KAGGADASAPURA, C V RAMAN NAGAR POST, BENGALURU-93 4. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD., R.O NO.144 & 145, SUBARAM COMPLEX, M G ROAD, BENGALURU-25 5. K N THANDAPANI S/O K NALLAPPA GOWNDER, MAJOR, NO.65, A.P.P NAGAR, PALANIGOUNDER, PUDUR,. ODDANCHATRAM TALUK, DINDIGAL DISTRICT-624619 6. THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD MAHALAXMI CHAMBERS, 2ND FLOOR, NO.9, M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-01 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B C SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 NOTICE TO R1, R3-R6 ARE DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD 24.03.2022) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.09.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO. 4580/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU CITY SCCH-4, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is field by the claimant under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 19881 challenging the judgment and award dated 03.09.2018 passed in MVC.Nos.4580/2015 by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-4)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. It is the case of the claimant that he was traveling in a Toyata Innova car on 08.08.2015 from Krishnagiri to Salem when a Jeep came from the opposite direction and hit the vehicle in which the petitioner was traveling. The vehicle of the petitioner was also hit by another vehicle from the hind side, causing the accident in question. Claiming compensation for the injuries sustained in the accident the claimant instituted the claim proceeding. The Tribunal by its judgment and award 1 Hereinafter referred as to ‘Act’ 2 Hereinafter referred as to ‘Tribunal’ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 dated 03.09.2018 partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a compensation of `2,54,000/- together with interest at 6% per annum and held that respondent Nos.1 and 2 jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation awarded. Respondent No.2 – insurer was directed to deposit the compensation awarded. Being aggrieved the present appeal is filed seeking for enhancement of compensation. 4. The finding of the Tribunal on negligence and liability are not under challenge and have attained finality. Hence, the only aspect adjudicated upon in the present appeal is with regard to the enhancement of compensation. 5. Heard submissions of learned counsel Sri. Shripad V Shastri, appearing for the appellant and learned counsel Sri. BC Shivanne Gowda, appearing for respondent No.2 – insurer. 6. It is a contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the disability assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side and that the compensation awarded on certain other heads is on the lower side. Hence, he seeks for enhancement of compensation. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 – insurer justifies the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and contends that the income assessed by the Tribunal is on the higher side and in view of the same, the total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. 8. The submissions of both the learned counsels have been considered and the material on record including the records of the Tribunal have been perused. 9. The claimant was aged 54 years who sustained fracture of left distal radius and right acetabulum both to the posterior and anterior wall as is forthcoming from wound certificate (Ex.P.5). It is also forthcoming from discharge summary (Ex.P.6) that the claimant was treated as inpatient from 08.08.2015 to 22.08.2015 that is for a period of 15 days. The doctor has been examined as PW.8 who has assessed the disability of the claimant in respect of mobility, stability and coordination activities. The whole body disability assessed by the doctor (PW.8) is 27%. It is further forthcoming from the discharge summary (Ex.P.6) that the claimant has undergone two surgeries that is on 12.08.2015 and 17.08.2015 which was - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 an open reduction and internal fixation. The Doctor PW.8 has also deposed regarding the treatment that has been taken by the claimant which is also detailed in the discharge summary (Ex.P.6). 10. The claimant has averred that he was carrying on real-estate business. However, no documents have been produced to prove the income. The Tribunal has assessed the income of the claimant at `10,000/-p.m, by considering the income of the claimant as notional income. Having regard to the fact that no documents have been produced by the claimant to prove the income and keeping the date of accident it is just and proper that the income of the claimant is re- assessed at `9,000/- p.m. 11. The Tribunal, while assessing the disability, upon noticing that the evidence of the doctor has recorded a finding that the disability assessed by PW.8 is on the higher side and re-assessed the disability at 9%. It is pertinent to note here that the disability assessed by the doctor at 27% was with regard to the whole body. PW.8 having in detail noticed the disability cause to the claimant by virtue of the injuries and - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 there being no effective cross-examination of PW.8, it is just and proper that the disability to the claimant be re-assessed at 25% to the whole body. 12. Having regard to the aforementioned, the compensation is re-assessed as follows: i. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the period of treatment, the compensation awarded towards pain and suffering is re-assessed as `50,000/-, as against `40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. ii. The Tribunal has awarded sum of `20,100/- towards medical expenses which is as per actuals and is just and proper. iii. The Tribunal has awarded loss of income for laid up period by taking laid up period as two months. However, having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the period of treatment, it is just and proper that the laid up period be re-assessed as three months and accordingly compensation of `(9,000 X 3 )=`27,000/- is awarded towards the same. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 iv. Having regard to the period during which the claimant is treated as inpatient it is just and proper to award sum of `20,000/- towards food, nourishment and attendant charges injuries as against `15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. v. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the resultant disability, the loss of amenities is re- assessed at `30,000/- as against `20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. vi. The disability having been re-assessed at `25%, the compensation towards the same is re-assessed at (9,000 X 12 X 11 X 25%) =`2,97,000/- as against `1,18,800/- awarded by the Tribunal. vii. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of `20,000/- towards future medical expenses. It is noticed that PW.8 has deposed that claimant will have to under go another surgery. However, the details of the same have not been stated. Hence, there is no basis to award any compensation towards further medical expenses and the same is set aside. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 13. In view of the aforementioned, the compensation re-assessed is as follows: Sl.No Compensation Head Amount Awarded by the Tribunal (`) Amount awarded by this Court (`) 1 Pain and suffering 40000.00 50000.00 2 Towards medical expenses 20100.00 20100.00 3 Towards loss of income during laid up period 20000.00 27000.00 4 Disability 118800.00 297000.00 5 Towards food, nourishment and attendant charges 15000.00 20000.00 6 Loss of amenities 20000.00 30000.00 7 Towards future medical expenses 20000.00 00.00 Total 253900.00 444100.00 14. Accordingly, the claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of (`4,44,100/- - `2,53,900/-) `1,90,200/-. 15. In view of the aforementioned, the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part; ii) The judgment and award dated 03.09.2018 passed in MVC.Nos.4580/2015 by the Motor Vehicle - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-4), is hereby modified to the extent stated herein. In all other respects, the judgment and award of the Tribunal remains unaltered; iii) The appellant/claimant is entitled to an enhanced compensation of `1,90,200/- together with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till its realization in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal; iv) Respondent No.2 – insurer is directed to deposit the said compensation together with accrued interest within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; v) Upon such deposit, the entire enhanced compensation together with interest accrued thereupon is to be disbursed to the claimant; vi) The Registry to draw the modified award accordingly; vii) Records of the Tribunal be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. No costs. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:18878 MFA No. 6429 of 2019 In view of the disposal of the above appeal, pending interlocutory application does not survive for consideration and stands disposed of. SD/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE PNV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27