- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4429 MFA No. 6192 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6192 OF 2024 (MV-I) BETWEEN: P.G.DARSHAN, S/O LATE P.M.GANESH, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, R/AT MATHUR VILLAGE, PONNAMPET, VIRAJPET TALUK, COORG DISTRICT - 571 216. …APPELLANT (BY SRI HARSHA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI SACHIN B.S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHAMALA R., W/O CHANDRASHEKAR, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT C-3, MOTAPPA READDY BUILDING, VINAYAK NAGAR, THIRUPALYA, HEBBAGODI, BENGALURU - 560 099. 2. PEMMAIAH B.N., S/O NANJAPPA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, R/AT TERALU VILLAGE AND POST, PONNAMPET TALUK, COORG - 5712 49. 3. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., FIRST FLOOR, SRI LAKSHMI COMPLEX, COLLEGE ROAD, NEAR SBI MAIN BRANCH, MADIKERI, COORG DISTRICT - 571 249, POLICE NO.6724023120020012634. 4. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4429 MFA No. 6192 of 2024 KATHA NO.42/61, SURVEY NO.39.39/1, ABOVE UNION BANK OF INDIA, GANAPATHY STREET CHOWK, MADIKERI, KODAGU DISTRICT - 571 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI V. RAJASHEKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R3; VIDE ORDER DATED 15.11.2024, NOTICE TO R1, R2 AND R4 IS DISPENSED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.06.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.4/2022 BY II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MACT, KODAGU- MADIKERI SITTING AT VIRAJPET. 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 18.06.2024 passed in MVC.No.4/2022 by the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge and MACT, Kodagu-Madikeri sitting at Virajpet (for short ‘the tribunal’). The appeal is preferred on the premise of inadequate and meager compensation awarded by the tribunal. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4429 MFA No. 6192 of 2024 2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are as under: On 06.11.2021 at about 9.15 p.m., the claimant was going to his house from Ponnampete town towards Gonikoppal side after purchasing household articles on his Scooty bearing regiatration No.KA-09-EQ-9264, when he reached near the Taluk Office, Ponnampete main road, a Maruthi Alto car bearing registration No.KA-05-Z-2517 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant. Due to the said impact, the claimant fell down and sustained grievous injuries to both his legs and hands. Immediately, he was shifted to Gonikoppal Government Hospital, wherein, first aid treatment was given and thereafter, to K.R.Hospital, Mysuru, wherein, he took treatment as an inpatient and underwent surgery. Hence, the claimant filed a claim petition seeking compensation. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4429 MFA No. 6192 of 2024 3.1 On service of notice, respondents appeared through their counsel and filed their respective written statements, denying the averments made in the claim petition and sought for dismissal of the claim petition. 3.2 On the basis of material evidence, both oral and documentary and on hearing the submissions of learned counsels for both parties, the tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.8,40,570/- with interest @ 6% p.a. (excluding interest on future medical expenses of Rs.25,000/-) and directed respondent No.3-Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount within two months. 3.3 Being aggrieved by the inadequate compensation amount awarded by the tribunal, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. 4. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for appellant-claimant that the tribunal has awarded meager compensation, which is inadequate and - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4429 MFA No. 6192 of 2024 erroneous. The tribunal has committed an error in not arriving at the proper percentage of disability, considering the magnitude of the injuries suffered and the opinion expressed by the Doctor, who is examined as CW.1. It is also contended that under other heads also, compensation awarded is meager and the same requires enhancement. On these grounds, he seeks enhancement of compensation. 5. Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondent-Insurance Company sustains the order passed by the tribunal rather he contends that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is on the higher side. The tribunal has rightly considered the injuries and the opinion expressed by the Doctor-CW.1 and awarded disability at 20% to the whole body, which does not call for interference. Also, the compensation awarded under other heads is just and reasonable, which does not require any interference by this Court. Accordingly, he seeks dismissal of the appeal. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4429 MFA No. 6192 of 2024 6. Having heard learned counsel for appellant- claimant and learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company, the occurrence of the accident, involvement of the vehicle and injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident are all established and proved by the production of Exs.P1 to P12 and Exs.C1 to C6. The issuance of insurance policy is not in dispute against the offending vehicle. Therefore, the negligence is rightly attributed against the driver of the offending vehicle. 7. Now coming to the aspect of age, avocation and income, it is stated that age of the claimant was 19 years as on the date of occurrence of accident. The tribunal taken the income of Rs.15,000/- per month as notional income and the appropriate multiplier applied by the tribunal is '18', which do not call for interference and the same are retained. 8. Now coming to the aspect of disability, the Doctor- CW.1 has opined the disability to the extent of 33% to the upper limb, 42% to the left lower limb and 39% to the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:4429 MFA No. 6192 of 2024 right lower limb. It appears that there is no proper clarity by the Doctor-CW.1 in giving a clear finding as to the disability to the whole body. Hence, the tribunal has taken the disability at 20% to the whole body. This Court is of the opinion that the disability could be increased to 25% to the whole body, considering the injuries sustained to both the upper limb as well as the lower limb. Therefore, the loss of future income due to disability would be Rs.8,10,000/- (Rs.15,000/- x 12 x 18 x 25%) as against Rs.6,48,000/- awarded by the tribunal. 9. The tribunal awarded Rs.60,000/- towards pain and suffering, mental agony, Rs.45,000/- towards loss of earning during laid up period and Rs.42,570/- towards medical expenses, which do not call for interference and the same are retained. 10. The tribunal awarded Rs.20,000/- towards special diet and conveyance. However, this Court deems it appropriate to award Rs.30,000/- under this head. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:4429 MFA No. 6192 of 2024 11. The tribunal awarded Rs.25,000/- towards future medical expenses. However, this Court deems it appropriate to award Rs.35,000/- under this head. 12. In view of the above, the claimant would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.10,22,570/- as against Rs.8,40,570/- as mentioned in the table below: Heads Amount in Rs. Pain and suffering, mental agony 60,000-00 Loss of earning during laid up period 45,000-00 Medical expenses 42,570-00 Special diet and conveyance 30,000-00 Loss of future income due to disability 8,10,000-00 Future medical expenses 35,000-00 TOTAL 10,22,570-00 13. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed-in-part; ii) The judgment and award dated 18.06.2024 passed in MVC.No.4/2022 by the Court of II Additional District and Sessions Judge and MACT, Kodagu-Madikeri sitting at Virajpet, is modified; - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:4429 MFA No. 6192 of 2024 iii) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.10,22,570/- as against Rs.8,40,570/- along with interest @ 6% p.a.; iv) The enhanced compensation amount shall be paid with interest @ 6% p.a. (excluding future medical expenses) by respondent No.3- Insurance Company within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; v) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the tribunal shall stand intact. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE CPN CT: BHK