- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37728 MFA No. 1853 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1853 OF 2020(MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI UMASHIVAKUMAR M S/O D.MUNIVENKATAPPA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.4/2, 4TH MAIN, 6TH CROSS, KADIRENAHALLI, BSK 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE 560070. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHANKAR PRASAD M B., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.9/2, 2ND FLOOR, MAHALKASHMI CHAMBERS, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE 560001. 2. ADARSHA.A. NO.15, 4TH MAIN BYRAVESWARANAGAR, BENGALURU-560072. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S V HEGDE MULKHAND, ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O/D 30.01.2020 NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH) MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 28.06.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.4646/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE IX-ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXXIV ACMM., COURT OF SMALL CAUSES Digitally signed by NANDINI R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37728 MFA No. 1853 of 2020 AND MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI ORAL JUDGMENT Heard both sides. With consent of both the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing and heard learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.1 - Insurance Company. 2. The appellant, who is a petitioner in MVC No.4646 of 2018, is before this Court, being aggrieved by the compensation determined by the 9th Additional Small Causes Judge and Addl. M.A.C.T, Bengaluru, by the judgment and award dated 28.06.2019. 3. The grievance of the appellant is only in respect of the quantum of compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal. The fact that the accident took place on 05.08.2018 at about - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37728 MFA No. 1853 of 2020 9.30 p.m. involving the motorcycle bearing No.KA-05- ES-9015 and the car bearing No.KA-03-MD-5893 is not in dispute. 4. The respondent No.1 is the insurer of the car and the coverage of the insurance as on the date of the accident is also not in dispute. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the petitioner was a Marketing Executive aged about 33 years, and due to the accident, he had suffered fracture of shaft of left humerus, right shoulder, head injury, injuries to the left knee and fracture of nasal bone. He was treated at GM Hospital, wherein he was an inpatient for a period of two days and had to undergo ORIF with plating. It is contended that the fracture of left humerus and the injuries to the right shoulder definitely affect his earning capacity, since he is a Marketing Executive involved in extensive travelling using his two wheeler. Therefore, it is submitted that the Tribunal erred in ascertaining the functional disability of the petitioner even though PW2 - Medical Officer had stated that the disability to the limb was 34%. It is contended that the disability should have been taken on the higher side in assessing the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37728 MFA No. 1853 of 2020 compensation. He also contends that there being no acceptable evidence in respect of income of the petitioner. The notional income has to be taken and the compensation be reassessed in the matter. 6. Per contra, learned counsel, Sri S.V. Hegde Mulkhand appearing for the respondent No.1 - Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has considered the notional income and the disability appropriately and there is no need for indulgence by this Court. 7. A careful perusal of the available records show that the petitioner being a Marketing Executive claimed that he had suffered the injury to the extent of 34% to the left upper limb. He contends that he is disabled to efficiently work as before, and therefore, there is a functional disability. It is evident that the physical disability stated by PW2 is 34% to the limb. The Tribunal should have made an effort to ascertain the functional disability attributable on account of physical disability stated by PW2. In the considered opinion of this Court, the functional disability of the petitioner cannot be less than one third of the physical disability, since he is using his limb for his day to day - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37728 MFA No. 1853 of 2020 commuting. Under these circumstances, the functional disability of the petitioner is considered at 12%. 8. The Tribunal has taken the notional income at ₹9,000/- p.m, which appears to be on the lower side. The guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (for short `KSLSA') for the purpose of settlement of disputes before the Lok Adalath, prescribe notional income of ₹12,500/- p.m. for the year 2018. In umpteen number of judgments, this Court has held that the guidelines issued by the KSLSA are in general conformity with the wages fixed under the Minimum Wages Act, and therefore, they are acceptable. Hence considering the notional income at ₹12,500/- p.m. and disability at 12%, the loss of future income due to the disability is calculated as ₹12,500x12x16x12% (₹2,88,000/-) by adopting multiplier of 16 for the age of 33 years. 9. As a consequence, holding that the petitioner could not resume his work at least for a period of three months, the loss of income during the laid up period is calculated as ₹12,500x 3 = ₹37,500/-. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37728 MFA No. 1853 of 2020 10. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation amount under the head of loss of amenities in life. The petitioner is going to suffer the disability for the rest of his life, and therefore, a sum of ₹30,000/- is awarded to him under this head. 11. The compensation awarded under the remaining heads does not require any enhancement. In the result, the petitioner is entitled for a total sum of ₹4,62,500.00 instead of ₹2,80,525.00 awarded by the Tribunal under the following heads: 1 Pain and sufferings, mental agony ₹50,000/- 2 Medical expenses ₹32,000/- 3 Special diet and conveyance ₹ 5,000/- 4 Loss of earning during treatment period. ₹37,500/- 5 Permanent disability ₹2,88,000/- 6 Future medical expenses ₹20,000/- 7 Loss amenities ₹30,000/- Total ₹4,62,500/- Less awarded by the Tribunal ₹2,80,525/- Enhancement ₹1,81,975/- Hence, the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part. ii) The appellant is entitled for a sum of ₹1,81,975/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal along - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37728 MFA No. 1853 of 2020 with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its deposit before the Tribunal. iii) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount within eight weeks from today. iv) The entire amount of enhancement be released to the petitioner. v) The remaining part of the order passed by the Tribunal is unaltered. Sd/- (C M JOSHI) JUDGE BKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9