- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37795 MFA No. 3869 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3869 OF 2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT SAKAMMA W/O RAJU, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT PADAVALAPATTNA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI NAGAMANGALA TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT …APPELLANT (BY SRI. KAILAS SHANKAR P S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI KULLEGOWDA S/O LATE NANJEGOWDA AGE MAJOR R/AT BANKAPURA VILLAGE, KANTHAPURA POST, HONAKERE HOBLI, NAGAMANGALA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT. 2. THE MANAGER TATA AIG GEN INSURANCE CO LTD., NO.69, 2ND FLOOR, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37795 MFA No. 3869 of 2019 J P & DEVI JAMBUKESHWAR ARCADE MILLERS ROAD, VASANTHANAGAR, BENGALURU- 560 052. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVI S SAMPRATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2; V/O DATED 11/07/2025, NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH) *** THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25/10/2018, PASSED IN MVC NO.5230/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE XIX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & MACT, BANGALORE (SCCH-17), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed by the injured claimant against the impugned judgment and award dated 25.10.2018 passed by the XIX Additional Small Causes - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37795 MFA No. 3869 of 2019 Judge & MACT, Bangalore (SCCH-17), in M.V.C.No.5230/2017. 2. The plaint averments in brief are that, the injured claimant (appellant herein) met with an accident on 22.07.2017 at about 8:30 p.m., while she was riding pillion in a motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-54/J- 8735 on Padavalapattna Village, near H.P. School, Kasaba, on account of the rash and negligent driving of the Tractor and Trailer bearing No.KA-54/T-3521/3522 by its driver. Due to the impact, she sustained grievous injuries. 3. On account of the grievous injuries sustained by her, the injured claimant filed a claim petition before the Tribunal, seeking compensation of a sum of `20,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence available on file, allowed the claim petition awarding compensation of a sum of `13,23,030/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of petition till realization from respondents. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37795 MFA No. 3869 of 2019 4. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the injured claimant has filed the present appeal, in which it is contended that the amount awarded under the heads loss of income during laid up period, loss of future income due to permanent disability, and loss of amenities, is very meager and prayed for enhancement of compensation. 5. Heard the arguments from both sides. 6. To substantiate her case, the appellant examined herself as PW-1 and examined two more witnesses as PW-2 and PW-3 (Doctor). She got marked as many as 24 documents from Exs.P-1 to P-24. However, on behalf of the respondents, neither any witness was examined nor any document was got marked as an exhibit. 7. As per Ex.P-9 - Wound Certificate, she sustained the following injuries: 1. Fracture both bone left leg with crush injury - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37795 MFA No. 3869 of 2019 2. Left with tarso metatarso and metatarso phalangeal dislocation with T.A. Avulsion. 8. The Doctor (PW-3), after clinical and radiological examination found unhealthy stump over the left foot with syme's amputation and X-ray showed fracture of tibia united with implants in situ with absence of tarsal, Meta tarsal and phalangeal bones. He stated that the appellant has suffered disability of 50%. Further, in the absence of the disability certificate, as per the guidelines, the disability for 4th and 5th metatarsal is 12%. For below knee amputation, the disability is 60% and 75% as per the guidelines. 9. It is stated that the appellant was aged about 42 years and working as a fruit vendor. On account of the injuries and the disability sustained, she was hospitalized for a period of thirty eight days from 22.07.2017 to 29.08.2017. She sustained fracture both bone left leg with crush injury, left with tarso metatarsal and metatarsal palangeal dislocation with T.A. Avulsion. The Doctor has - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37795 MFA No. 3869 of 2019 opined that the said injuries are grievous in nature. She underwent debridement and amputation of 4th and 5th toe plus tarso metatarsal amputation plus free LD slap & SSG. ORIF left Tibia and ORIF tarso metatarsal, metatarso pholongeal dislocation with K-wire. The Doctor has stated that the appellant has suffered disability of 50%. But, having regard to the nature of injuries sustained, disability assessed by the Doctor, guidelines, and oral and documentary evidence adduced, the Tribunal has assessed the whole body disability of the appellant at 30%. The same is just and proper. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to consider the disability at 30%. 10. Though the appellant did no produce any evidence regarding her income, having regard to the year of occurrence of the accident, i.e. 2017, this Court finds it reasonable to assess her income at `13,750/- per month as per the guidelines of the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. As on the date of accident, the appellant was aged 42 years and therefore the multiplier applicable is - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37795 MFA No. 3869 of 2019 '14'. Thus, the loss of future income works out to `6,93,000/- (i.e. `13,750/-x12x'14'x 30%) as against `5,04,000/- awarded by Tribunal. 11. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the compensation of `5,19,030/- awarded by Tribunal towards medical expenses. 12. Further, the compensation awarded towards pain and sufferings, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges, loss of amenities and future medical expenses needs no interference by this Court. 13. So far as the compensation awarded towards loss of income during laid-up period is concerned, considering the nature of injuries and the disability sustained, this Court finds that the appellant might have not attended to her work at least for a period of four months. Accordingly, the loss of income during laid up period works out to `55,000/- (i.e. `13,750/- x 4 months) as against `40,000/- awarded by Tribunal. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37795 MFA No. 3869 of 2019 14. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to the modified compensation as under: Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal (in `) Compensation awarded by this Court. (in `) 1 Pain and suffering 1,00,000-00 1,00,000-00 2 Medical expenses 5,19,030-00 5,19,030-00 3 Conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges 50,000-00 50,000-00 4 Loss of income during laid-up period (`13,750/- x4 months) 40,000-00 55,000-00 5 Loss of future earning capacity 5,04,000-00 6,93,000-00 6 Loss of amenities & enjoyment of life 60,000-00 60,000-00 7 Future medical expenses 50,000-00 50,000-00 Total: 13,23,030-00 15,27,030-00 15. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to compensation of ````15,27,030/- as against `13,23,030/- awarded by Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum, on the enhanced compensation. 16. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 25.10.2018 passed by the XIX Additional Small Causes - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37795 MFA No. 3869 of 2019 Judge & MACT, Bangalore (SCCH-17), in M.V.C.No.5230/2017, is hereby modified, awarding compensation of ````15,27,030/- as against `13,23,030/- awarded by Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum, on the enhanced compensation. The second respondent - Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation with interest at 6% per annum, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Draw the modified award accordingly. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE BMV* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23