- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21610 MFA No. 7554 of 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7554 OF 2016 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT. RADHAMMA, W/O NARAYANAPPA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.40 MAJARA KARADAGURU, MULBAGAL TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GURUDEVA PRASAD K.T.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VASUDEVAN N, MAJOR, S/O NARASIMHAN, R/AT OLD NO.4/115, NEW NO.329, SYNDICATE BANK COLONY, SALEM, TAMIL NADU-636 008. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., TP HUB, NO.18, KRUSHIBHAVAN, 6TH FLOOR, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, OPP: HUDSON CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560 001. BY ITS MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. K. SURESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2, R1-SERVED) Digitally signed by KORLAHALLI BHARATHIDEVIKRISHNACHARYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21610 MFA No. 7554 of 2016 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED22.06.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.2097/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE XV ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, & XXIII ACMM, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU(SCCH-19), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 22nd June 2016, passed by the Addl.Judge, Court of Small Causes, M.A.C.T., Bengaluru, (SCCH-19), (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.2097/2014, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, on 07.04.2014, at about 8.50 p.m., the claimant met with an accident due to rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle bearing registration No.TN-30-K-8519 by its rider. As a result, the claimant sustained compound fracture of both bones of - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21610 MFA No. 7554 of 2016 left leg. She was admitted as an inpatient in Yashomati Hospital, Bengaluru, from 07.04.2014 to 16.04.2014 and has suffered permanent disability. It is further stated that, she was a vegetable vendor and earning Rs.1,500/- per day. Due to the permanent disability, her income has been seriously affected. With these reasons, the claimant has prayed for awarding of compensation. 4. Respondent No.1 is the owner and respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending vehicle. The respondent No.2 in its written statement denied the contentions of the claim petitioner and denied its liability to pay the compensation. With these reasons, prayed to dismiss the claim petition. 5. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues, for its determination. 6. The claimant to prove her case examined two witnesses as PW-1 and PW-2 and marked 10 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-10. Respondent No.2 examined one - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21610 MFA No. 7554 of 2016 witness as RW-1 and marked documents as per Exs.R-1 to R-4. 7. The Tribunal after hearing both parties and appreciating the evidence on record, held that the accident occurred due to the negligence of rider of the motorcycle and assessed the following amount of compensation : Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and sufferings 10,000/- Medical expenses 65,000/- Attendant charges, extra nutritious food and transport expenses 3,000/- Loss of income during the period of treatment taken 12,000/- Total 90,000/- Being aggrieved by the said award passed by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed the present appeal for enhancement of compensation. 8. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the claimant as well as the insurer. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21610 MFA No. 7554 of 2016 9. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant submits that the Tribunal has awarded meagre amount of compensation and skipped many heads while awarding the compensation. Though the claimant has been suffering from permanent disability to an extent of 29% to the left lower limb, no amount of compensation is awarded under the head `loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability'. The claimant was admitted as an inpatient in the hospital for about 10 days, but meagre amount of compensation is awarded towards attendant charges and conveyance charges etc., Therefore, prayed for enhancement of the same. 10. Learned counsel for respondent No.2/insurer submits that considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has awarded a just and reasonable amount of compensation and it does not call for interference by this Court. 11. Following points arise for my determination : - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21610 MFA No. 7554 of 2016 (ii) Whether the claimant is entitled to enhancement of compensation? (ii) What order? Point No.1 : 12. Fact of the accident is not in dispute. Therefore, there is no need to reconsider the same. The injuries suffered by the claimant, treatment taken as an inpatient and she underwent surgery are all corroborated by the medical evidence. There are no reasons to disbelieve the same. As per the evidence of doctor PW-2, claimant has been suffering from permanent disability to an extent of 29.6% to the left lower limb and 14.8% to the whole body. The said assessment is not in accordance with the ALEMCO Manual and Central Government Guidelines. According to it, the disability of left lower limb, when converted to whole body disability, it will be taken as 1/3rd of the limb disability. Hence, she is suffering from permanent disability to an extent of 10% to the whole body. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21610 MFA No. 7554 of 2016 13. The claimant is unable to prove her income. Therefore, following the chart of notional income prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the income of the claimant is taken as Rs.8,500/- per month. 14. According to the medical evidence, the age of the claimant was 35 years at the time of the accident. The same age is mentioned in the claim petition. Therefore, age of the claimant is taken as 35 years. The suitable multiplier applicable in the present case is `16'. 15. The claimant is said to be a vegetable vendor. During laid up period, she must have lost her earnings. Since she has sustained fracture of both the bones of left leg, at least, for a period of three to four months, she was not be in a position to attend to her work and earn. Looking at the nature of injuries and the treatment taken, the amount of compensation awarded under other heads are on the lower side, which needs to recalculated. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21610 MFA No. 7554 of 2016 16. Accordingly, following amount of compensation is awarded: Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and sufferings 40,000/- Medical expenses 65,000/- Special diet, conveyance and attendant charges 25,000/- Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.8,500/- x 4) 34,000/- Loss of future earning capacity due to disability (Rs.8,500/- x 12 x 16x 10%) 1,63,200/- Loss of amenities and future unhappiness 25,000/- Future medical expenses 25,000/- Total 3,77,200/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal Enhancement- 90,000/- 2,87,200/- 17. Thus, the claimant is entitled for interest at 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount from the date of petition till its realization. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21610 MFA No. 7554 of 2016 18. It is not in dispute that respondent No.1 is the owner and respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending vehicle. Therefore, both the respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative. 19. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated 22nd June 2016, passed in MVC No.2097/2014 by the Addl.Judge, Court of Small Causes, M.A.C.T., Bengaluru, (SCCH-19), stands modified; iii) The claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.2,87,200/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount, from the date of petition till its realization. iv) The respondent No.2 - Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21610 MFA No. 7554 of 2016 v) Out of the compensation amount, the claimant shall deposit Rs.1,25,000/- in any Nationalised Bank for a period of two years. The remaining amount shall be released in favour of the claimant. vi) No order as to costs. vii) Draw award accordingly. Registry is directed to send back the records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE bk List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14