- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101084 OF 2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SHRI. LAKKAPPA S/O. SATYAPPA BADACHI, AGE 60 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE COOLIE (NOW NIL), R/O. BEDAR GALLI, SHEBAL, TQ: ATHANI, DIST: BELAGAVI-591315. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. G. R. TURAMARI, ADV. FOR SRI. H. D. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI. APPAYYA S/O. YALLAPPA MANNIKERI, AGE MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. A/P: MALADINNI, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELAGAVI-591233. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, HAVING ITS DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT 2ND FLOOR, PRABHU BUILDING, 1732, RAMDEV GALLI, BELAGAVI-590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. GANGADHAR S. HOSAKERI, ADV. FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 31.12.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.2302/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER OF ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI, 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: Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA) 1. This appeal is by the claimant in MVC No.2302/2018 on the file of X Additional District and Member of Additional MACT, Belagavi, against the judgment and award dated 31.12.2019. 2. The parties are referred to as per their rankings before the trial Court, for the sake of convenience. 3. Brief facts of the case are as follows: On 04.10.2018 at about 16.30 hours one Vinod Mande and petitioner were going on a Motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-23 EM-8056. The deceased was rider and claimant was pillion rider. They met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of Telco LGV tempo bearing registration No.KA-25/A-6222 on Maishal-Tasagaon Phata road, near Khot Malya. As a result of which, both sustained injuries; rider of the vehicle succumbed to the injuries and claimant had sustained fracture of right distal third tibia and fibula and displaced - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 fracture of patella. He had taken treatment in Government Medical College hospital at Miraj as inpatient from 04.10.2018 to 12.10.2018. He has been suffering from permanent disability due to injuries sustained in the accident. He further contended that he was aged about 59 years at the time of accident and he was an agriculturist and earning Rs.12,000/- per month. Due to injuries sustained in the accident, he has been suffering from permanent disability. With these reasons, prayed to award to compensation of Rs.12,00,000/-. 4. The respondent/insurer filed an objection to the claim petition, denying the contentions of the claimant and further contended that its liability is restricted to the terms and conditions of insurance policy and holding of valid and effective driving licence by the driver of the offended vehicle. 5. Based on the rival contentions of the parties, the tribunal has framed the necessary issues. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 1) Whether the petitioner proves that, he suffered injuries as mentioned in Column No.11 of the claim petition in a road traffic accident occurred on 04.10.2018 at 4.30 pm, near Khot Malya on Maishal- Tasagaon Phata road, within the limits of Vijayanagar village, due to actionable negligence of the driver of Telco LGV tempo bearing registration No.KA-25/A-6222? 2) Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, what extent and from whom? 3) To what award or order? 6. MVC Nos.2301/2018 and 2302/2018, which arises out of a common accident, were tried together. The claimants examined four witnesses as PW-1 to PW-4 and got marked 21 documents as per Ex.P1 to P21. Respondent No.2 examined one witness as RW-1 and got marked 8 documents as per Exs.R1 to R8. 7. After hearing of both parties, the tribunal awarded a global compensation of Rs.80,000/- to the appellant/claimant by the impugned Judgment and award dated 31.12.2019. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant has preferred this appeal. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 8. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsels for the appellant and respondent No.2 and perused the materials on record. 9. The following question arises for my determination. (i) Whether the compensation awarded by the tribunal is inadequate? (ii) Whether interference by this Court is required? 10. My finding in the above points: (i) Partly affirmative. (ii) For the following reasons. Point No.(i) 11. The Tribunal accepted the injuries sustained by the claimant but did not award compensation under the head of loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability, for the reasons that treated Doctor has not been - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 examined. Therefore, the tribunal treated the injury as a simple fracture and awarded global compensation. 12. It is true that, the treated Doctor shall be examined, but for the various reasons the treated Doctor do not appear before the Court. Unless the injury stated by the treated doctor do not tally with the injuries stated by the doctor, who has assessed the disability, there may not be any hurdle to consider the said evidence of doctor, but it shall be carefully analysed/appreciated. 13. In this case PW-2 was examined to prove disability. He has assessed the disability of the claimant as 45% to a particular limb. Looking to the age of the victim, nature of the injuries sustained by him, it appears the said disability given by him is on higher side. He was agriculture coolie aged about 60 years. Considering these facts, fracture of the tibia and fibula along with patella, would definitely affects the efficiency of the victim and his earning capacity. Considering these facts and circumstances as well as on the evidence of PW-2, the - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 disability of the claimant is assessed at 10% for the whole body. 14. The claimant contended before the tribunal that he was earning Rs.12,000/- per month by working as an agriculture coolie. However, there is no evidence to accept the said income. Therefore, the notional income has to be determined according to the income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, which normally considered at the time of settlement of the disputes in the Lok-Adalat. Considering the relevant year of the accident, the notional income of a victim of an accident, who is unable to prove his income can be taken as Rs.11,750/-. The same can be applied to the facts of the present case. The age of the victim was 59 years and therefore suitable multiplier applicable in this case is 9. Taking into account of the above said calculations, amount of compensation under the head loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability is recalculated. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 15. The claimant sustained a fracture and was treated as an inpatient in the Government Hospital. While undergoing the treatment, he might have incurred some expenses towards incidental expenses, special diet, attendant charges and other related expenditures, etc,. 16. The claimant has been suffering from permanent disability. According to the evidence of PW-2, it is 45% of the whole body. Considering the age of the victim, the injuries sustained by him and nature of his work, he has been suffering from loss of amenities, which is available to a healthy person. The tribunal has not awarded compensation on the individual heads. Considering these facts, compensation needs to be awarded under different heads. Accordingly, the following amounts of compensation are awarded under the different heads. 1. Pain and suffering Rs.20,000/- 2. Medical and incidental expenses Rs.15,000/- - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 3. Loss of income during laid-up laid up period (Rs.11,750 x 3) Rs.35,250/- 4. Loss of amenities Rs.20,000/- 5. Loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability (Rs.11,750/- x 12 x 10% x 9) Rs.1,26,900/- TOTAL Rs.2,17,150/- Less: Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs.80,000/- Enhanced amount of compensation Rs.1,37,150/- 17. The claimant is entitled to an enhancement of amount of Rs.1,37,150/-. It is not in dispute that, respondent No.2 is liable to pay the said amount of compensation. The fact of the accident and nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant are not in dispute. Therefore, there is no need to discuss these facts in detail. 18. Though respondent No.2 denied liability to pay the compensation, the tribunal after assigning the valid reasons fastened the liability on respondent No.2 to pay compensation. The said judgment is challenged by the appellant in MFA No.101333/2020. However, the said case - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 was dismissed for non-compliance with office objections. Therefore, respondent No.2 is liable to pay the compensation. For the aforesaid discussion, I answer question No.1 is partly affirmative. 19. In view of reasons stated above, I pass for the following : ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The impugned Judgment and award dated 31.12.2019 passed by the X Additional and MACT, Belagavi in MVC No.2302/2018 is modified. (iii) The claimant is entitled to an enhancement of compensation of Rs.1,37,150/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition and till its realization, in addition to the amount awarded by the Tribunal. (iv) The respondent No.2 shall pay the said amount within a period of six weeks from - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4394 MFA No. 101084 of 2020 the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (v) Out of the enhanced compensation amount, 50% shall be deposited in an interest according Fixed Deposit in any nationalized Bank of the claimant’s choice for a period of three years and the remaining 50% shall be released in favour of the claimant upon proper identification. The claimant is also entitled to withdraw periodical interest accruing from the Fixed Deposit. (vi) Registry shall send back the trial Court records along with a copy of this Judgment to the Tribunal forthwith. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE RHR /CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 5