- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:16385 MFA No. 7674 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7674 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: ABHILASH S/O PARAMASHIVAM AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/AT NO.10/14, MISSION ROAD 3RD CROSS, SUBBAIAH CIRCLE SAMPANGIRAMANAGAR BANGALORE-27 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V SHASTRI, ADV.) AND: 1. THE ICICI LOMBORD GENERAL NSURANCE CO LTD., NO.89 2ND FLOOR, S.R.V. COMPLEX HOSUR MAIN RAOD MADIVALA, BANGALORE-68 BY ITS MANAGER 2. MISS ANNIEMOLLY RODRIGUES D/O SANTHOSH JOSEPH LOBO NO.59, 3RD CROSS, 1ST BLOCK 3RD PHASE, BSK 3RD STAGE BANGALORE-85. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADV. FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 16.03.2023 SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R2 ANNIEMOLLY RODRIGUES IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.02.2015 Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:16385 MFA No. 7674 of 2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.4826/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, XVI ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE CITY(SCCH-14) PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR DISMISSAL, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC.No.4826/2013 dated 25.02.2015 by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru City (SCCH- 14), claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation as well as questioning the contributory negligence fixed at 30% on the claimant. 2. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant. 3. It is the case of the claimant that on 12.08.2013 at about 9.30 a.m, the claimant was riding his motorcycle at 9th Cross, Wilson Garden, Main Road, Bengaluru. At that time, Santro car driven by its driver in - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:16385 MFA No. 7674 of 2015 a high speed, came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle. Due to that, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries all over the body. He was taken to the hospital. It is his case that he had spent huge amount for the treatment and as per the evidence of the doctor, he had sustained 15% disability to the whole body. The Court had taken Rs.7,000/- p.m. as the income and granted the compensation as per the table given below. SL.NO. PARTICULARS AMOUNT IN RS. 1. Pain and Sufferring 40,000/- 2. Medical expenses 1,41,000/- 3. Nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges 15,000/- 4. Loss of income 28,000/- 5. Loss of future income 2,26,800/- 6. Loss of amenities 25,000/- 7. Future Medical expenses 50,000/- 4. The Court had fixed the contributory negligence at 30% on the claimant. The Court had observed that filing of the charge sheet against the driver of the car does not come in the way of the Court to hold that the claimant was also negligent and contributed to the accident. It is stated - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:16385 MFA No. 7674 of 2015 by the respondents that a separate case is registered against the claimant, but no document is produced by them to substantiate their contention. There is nothing on record to believe that the police have filed charge sheet against the claimant in respect of the said accident. Further, as per the Motor Vehicle Rules, the claimant ought to have given way to the car to proceed further and then, he should have proceeded on his way. Damages caused to the vehicles indicate that the claimant has dashed the car on its front left portion. The brake system of both the vehicles was in order. Accordingly, there is contributory negligence at 30% percent on the claimant. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that the Court without any basis had fixed the contributory negligence on the claimant at 30%. It is submitted that the police records clearly reveals that because of the opposite vehicle, the accident has happened. When it comes to the compensation, it is submitted that the Court had taken the income at - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:16385 MFA No. 7674 of 2015 Rs.7,000/- p.m. which ought to have taken the income at Rs.8,000/-. 6. It is further submitted that towards the loss of future income, the Court ought to have granted future prospects considering the age of the claimant. It is submitted that even the compensation that is awarded under other heads is also on the lower side. 7. The learned counsel for the respondent- insurance company submits that the Court has rightly passed an order and no interference is called for. 8. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. Under the head of pain and suffering, medical expenses, nourishment and future medical expenses, the Court had rightly granted the compensation and no interference is called for. Then coming to the loss of income, considering the fact that the accident is of the year 2013, this court is taking the income at Rs.8,000/-x4, it comes to Rs.32,000/-. Then coming to the loss of future income, the submission of the learned - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:16385 MFA No. 7674 of 2015 counsel that future prospects needs to be added, the Court has not done. Accepting the said argument, loss of future income comes to Rs.2,59,200/-[Rs.8,000/- x12x18x15/100]. Coming to the loss of amenities, this Court has granted Rs.30,000/-. 9. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala vs. M. Malathi and Another1, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. 10. The claimant is therefore, entitled to the compensation under the following heads: SL. NO. HEADS Compensation Awarded by Tribunal Compensation Awarded by this Court 1. Pain and Sufferring 40,000/- 40,000/- 2. Medical expenses 1,41,000/- 1,41,000/- 3. Nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges 15,000/- 15,000/- 4. Loss of income 28,000/- 32,000/- 5. Loss of future income 2,26,800/- 2,59,200/- 6. Loss of amenities 25,000/- 30,000/- 7. Future Medical expenses 50,000/- 50,000/- 8. Legal expenses - 10,000/- TOTAL 5,25,800/- 5,77,200/- 1 (2014) 11 SCC 178 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:16385 MFA No. 7674 of 2015 11. Altogether, the claimant is entitled for compensation of an amount of Rs.5,77,200/-. 12. Coming to the contributory negligence, this Court has perused the order passed by the Court and the reason given by the Court. However, fixing the contributory negligence at 30% is on the higher side and this Court is fixing the contributory negligence at 5% on the claimant. In view of the same, insurance company is likely to pay an amount of Rs.5,48,340/-. 13. Accordingly, the appeal of the claimant is partly allowed enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.5,25,000/- to Rs.5,48,340/-. i) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. ii) The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Tribunal. iii) The respondent No.1-Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:16385 MFA No. 7674 of 2015 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security. iv) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. v) No costs. vi) Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE UN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4