- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5372 OF 2021 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI HANUMANTHAPPA S/O.LATE SIDDARAMMAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS R/AT JAVOOR VILLAGE SHIVANI HOBLI TARIKERE TALUK CHIKKAMANGLUR DISTRICT-577 145 PRESENTLY R/AT DOOR NO.10E1 HMT WATCH FACTORY COLONY BENGALURU …APPELLANT (BY SRI H.B.RUDRESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S.IFFCO TOKYO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED SRI SHANTHI TOWERS, 5TH FLOOR NO.141, 3RD MAIN EAST OF NGEF LAYOUT KASTURINAGAR BENGALURU-560 043 2. SRI PRAKASH K.S. S/O.SHIVAPPA H.N. R/AT 'PREETHAM NILAYA' LIC EXTENSION, GIRINAGARA TARIKERI TALUK CHIKKAMANGALURU DISTRICT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI KRISHNA KISHORE S., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI G.M.HEMANTH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.07.2021 PASSED IN MVC.NO.2512/2019 BY IX C/C. XIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER-MACT, BENGALURU. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the appellant-claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 29.07.2021 passed in MVC.No.2512/2019 by the Court of IX C/c XIII ASCJ and ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Member-MACT, Bengaluru (for short ‘the tribunal’). The appeal is preferred on the premise of inadequate and meager compensation awarded by the tribunal. 2. Though this matter is listed for admission, with consent of learned counsels for both parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the tribunal. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 4. Brief facts of the case are as under: On 08.12.2018 at about 7.30 p.m., the claimant had gone outside to throw the old flowers from the temple and returning to the temple. At that time, one car bearing registration No.KA-18-P-1336 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him, due to which, the claimant suffered grievous injuries to his both legs, face, eyes and hands and immediately he was shifted to Government Hospital, Ajjampura, where he took first aid treatment and thereafter, he was shifted to J.P.Hospital, Shivamogga, where he underwent surgery and again thereafter, he was shifted to Venlock Hospital, Mangaluru for better treatment. 4.1 It is further stated by the claimant that he was working as a Priest in Sri Kukududamma Temple, Ajjampura and was earning a salary of Rs.16,000/- per month. Due to the grievous injuries suffered by the claimant, he is unable to do his day-to-day activities as a Priest and unable to earn his income. It is also stated that - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 the claimant spent a sum of Rs.11,40,000/- towards medical treatment and other charges. Hence, he filed a claim petition seeking compensation. 4.2 On service of notice, the respondents appeared and filed their written statement denying the claim of the claimant including negligence attributed as against the driver of the offending car. Hence, sought for dismissal of the claim petition. 4.3 On the basis of pleadings, the tribunal framed relevant issues for consideration. 4.4 In order to substantiate the issue and to establish the case, the claimant got examined himself as PW.1 and the Doctor as PW.2 and got marked documents from Exs.P1 to P18. On the contrary, the respondents neither examined any witness nor got marked any document. 4.5 On the basis of material evidence produced by the parties, the tribunal awarded the compensation of - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 Rs.3,98,022/- with interest @ 6% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to pay the compensation within a period of one month. 4.6 Being aggrieved by the meager compensation amount awarded by the tribunal, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. 5. It is the vehement contention of learned counsel for appellant-claimant that the judgment and award passed by the tribunal is contrary to materials placed on record and the compensation awarded is on the lower side and the same requires to be enhanced. It is further contended by learned counsel for claimant that the tribunal has not taken into consideration the materials placed on record with regard to income earned by the claimant, the magnitude of the injuries suffered and pain and agony, so also, no compensation is awarded towards loss of income during laid-up period. In fact, learned counsel further contends that future prospects requires to be awarded in this case, in view of the magnitude of - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 injuries suffered by the claimant. Hence, he seeks to enhance the compensation. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent- Insurance Company sustains the judgment and award passed by the tribunal, contending that the tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation. He further contends that no proof of income is placed on record to award compensation towards loss of income due to disability. The tribunal, nevertheless, taken the income at Rs.9,000/- per month and awarded reasonable compensation, which does not call for interference. 7. Having heard learned counsel for appellant- claimant and learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company and perused the impugned judgment and award, it is seen that the accident occurred on 08.12.2018 at 7.30 p.m. and there is no dispute with regard to occurrence of accident, involvement of vehicle and injuries suffered by the claimant due to the accident and the treatment taken by the claimant in the Hospital as - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 mentioned in the claim petition. Therefore, the negligence is rightly attributed as against the driver of the offending vehicle. 8. Now coming to the age, avocation, income and quantum of compensation, it is not in dispute that the claimant was aged 55 years as on the date of occurrence of accident. Though it is claimed that he was working as a Priest in a temple, no document is produced to show his income. The notional income chart of the Legal Services Authority prescribes Rs.12,500/- per month for the accident of the year 2018. The same is taken as the income of the claimant in the present case. The tribunal applied the multiplier at '11', which does not call for interference and the same is retained. 9. The Doctor, who is an Orthopaedic Surgeon at Victoria Hospital, has been examined as PW.2 and he was opined the permanent physical disability to an extent of 54% to the right lower limb due to malunion and 27% to the whole body disability. However, the tribunal not - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 accepting the version of the Doctor, taken the disability at 9% and awarded compensation of Rs.1,06,920/- towards loss future income due to disability. 10. It is to be seen that though the claimant was working as a Priest in the temple and due to lack of any material documents to substantiate the same, the income of Rs.12,500/- is taken as per notional income chart and the multiplier at '11'. PW.2-Doctor has assessed the disability at 54% to the right lower limb. However, in my opinion, considering the magnitude of injuries and looking at exhibits produced by the claimant, the disability of 20% is assessed for awarding compensation towards loss of future income. Therefore, the claimant would be entitled to Rs.3,30,000/- (Rs.12,500/- x 12 x 11 x 20%) under this head as against Rs.1,06,920/- awarded by the tribunal. 11. The tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering. However, looking into the exhibits produced and the magnitude of the injuries suffered by the claimant, - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 for no fault of his, this Court deems it appropriate to award Rs.60,000/- under this head. 12. The tribunal awarded Rs.2,63,602/- towards medical expenses. However, the total medical bills produced by the claimant is Rs.5,30,000/-. The tribunal has not agreed with the medical bills with regard to ambulance receipts produced by the claimant amounting to Rs.70,000/-. I do not find any good ground for the tribunal to have refused to accept those bills. Considering the fact that the claimant has met with a terrible injury and he was admitted to the Hospital multiple times and he was unable to travel either in two wheeler or four wheeler without being sedated, this Court is of the opinion that the bills so submitted to an extent of Rs.70,000/-, requires to be taken on the face value and accepted. The same will have to be accepted as the copies of the original bills are furnished and merely because there is no authentic GST number, it cannot be denied. Considering the fact that the Motor Vehicles Act is a Welfare Legislation Scheme, a sum - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 of Rs.5,30,000/- requires to be awarded towards medical expenses as against Rs.2,63,602/- awarded by the tribunal. 13. With regard to attendant, food, nourishment, transportation and miscellaneous expenditure, it is seen from the medical records that the clamant was admitted to the Hospital as an inpatient for ten (10) months i.e. for 300 days and Rs.500/- is taken as per day charges. Therefore, Rs.1,50,000/- (Rs.500/- x 300) is awarded under this head. 14. The tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- towards loss of amenities. However, this Court deems it appropriate to award additional amount of Rs.35,000/- under this head. In all, the claimant would be entitled to Rs.50,000/- under this head. 15. The tribunal has failed to award compensation towards loss of income during laid up period. However, the claimant was inpatient for ten (10) months and he would - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 require atleast six (06) months period to recuperate and get back to his normal day to day activities, therefore, in all, 16 months is taken to calculate the compensation under this head. Therefore, the claimant would be entitled to Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs.12,500/- x 16) towards loss of income during laid up period. 16. During the pendency of this appeal, learned counsel for appellant has filed an application in IA.No.1/2022 along with certain additional medical bills amounting to Rs.4,218/- and hospital bills amounting to Rs.27,495/-, which are incurred post judgment and award rendered by the tribunal for the injuries sustained in the accident. Considering the magnitude of the injuries suffered by the claimant, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the application in IA.No.1/2022 and accept the medical and hospital bills. Accordingly, it is allowed. A sum of Rs.31,713/- (Rs.4,218/- + Rs.27,495/-) is awarded towards additional medical expenses incurred by the claimant for treatment of injuries suffered in the accident. - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 17. In view of the above, the claimant would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.13,51,713/- as against Rs.3,98,022/- as mentioned in the table below: Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of future earning capacity 3,30,000-00 Pain and suffering 60,000-00 Medical expenses 5,30,000-00 Attendant, food, nourishment, transportation and miscellaneous expenditure 1,50,000-00 Loss of amenities 50,000-00 Loss of income during laid up period 2,00,000-00 Additional medical expenses 31,713-00 TOTAL 13,51,713-00 18. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed-in-part; ii) The judgment and award dated 29.07.2021 passed in MVC.No.2512/2019 by the Court of IX C/c XIII ASCJ and ACMM, Court of Small Causes, Member-MACT, Bengaluru, is modified; iii) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.13,51,713/- as against Rs.3,98,022/- along with interest @ 6% awarded by the tribunal; - 13 - NC: 2025:KHC:151 MFA No. 5372 of 2021 iv) The enhanced compensation amount shall be paid with interest @ 6% p.a. by respondent- Insurance Company within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order; v) The original records shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional tribunal forthwith; vi) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal with regard to release and deposit of the compensation amount is retained. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE LB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50