- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5840 MFA No. 101666 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101666 OF 2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SHRI. SANJAY BHOMANNI LAD AGE: 42 YEARS, OCC: MASON, NOW NIL, R/O. MACCHE, TQ AND DIST: BELAGAVI-590014. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. HARISH S.MAIGUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI. MAHESH LAXMAN ANGOLKAR AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. SHIVASHIKI NAGAR, MACCHE, DIST: BELAGAVI-590014. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., RAMDEV GALLI, BELAGAVI-590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.C.BHUTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.02.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.2584/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE XI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, 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:5840 MFA No. 101666 of 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA) 1. This appeal is by the claimant against the judgment and award dated 27.02.2019 passed in MVC No.2584/2017 by the XI Addl.Distrist and Sessions Judge and Addl. MACT, Belagavi (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) for enhancement of compensation. 2. The parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal. 3. Briefs facts of the case are that claimant met with an accident on 15.10.2017 on Belagavi-Khanapur road due to rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by its rider bearing registration No.KA-22/EY-7212. As a result of which he sustained fracture of tibia of distal 1/3rd and fracture of left fibula at proximal 1/3rd along with other injuries. He had taken treatment as inpatient for 4 days and spent more than Rs.1,00,000/- towards medical expenses. 4. Claimant was aged about 40 years at the time of accident. He was mason and earning Rs.18,000/- per - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5840 MFA No. 101666 of 2019 month. Due to injury sustained in the accident he is suffering from permanent disability that is affecting his earning capacity. With these reasons prayed to award compensation of Rs.35,00,000/-. 5. Respondent No.1 is owner, respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending motorcycle. Both have appeared and filed written statement before the tribunal. They denied the contentions of the claim petitioner. 6. Respondent No.1 further contended that rider of the motorcycle was not at all responsible for the accident in question. Said vehicle was insured with respondent No.2 and in the event, petition is allowed, respondent No.2 be directed to pay the compensation. 7. Respondent No.2 has further contended that fastening liability to pay the compensation is depending upon holding of valid and effective driving licence by the rider of the motorcycle and complying the terms and conditions of policy of insurance. With these reasons prayed to dismiss the claim petition. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5840 MFA No. 101666 of 2019 8. The Tribunal framed necessary issues based on the rival contentions of the parties. 9. Claimant to prove his case examined himself as PW1 and marked 15 documents as per Exs.P1 to P 15. Respondents marked one document as per Ex.R1. 10. After hearing both the parties, Tribunal held that accident had taken place due to rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by its rider. The tribunal also accepted the injury stated in the Exs.P7 to 12, 14 & 15 and accepted that claimant had sustained fracture of tibia and fibula of right leg. The Tribunal assessed age of the claimant as 40 years, his income as Rs.10,000/- per month, disability at 13% to the whole body and applied multiplier as 15 and awarded the following amount of compensation. Pain and suffering :Rs. 20,000.00 Medical expenses :Rs. 39,000.00 Future loss of earning :Rs.2,34,000.00 Loss of earning during treatment period :Rs. 20,000.00 Conveyance,attendant charges,nourishment :Rs. 4,000.00 Loss of amenities :Rs. 40,000.00 Total :Rs.3,36,000.00 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5840 MFA No. 101666 of 2019 11. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award claimant preferred this appeal on the ground of inadequate compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 12. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties. 13. The main contention of the learned advocate for the appellant is that the Tribunal has not considered the income of the claimant properly and disability assessed by the Tribunal is on much lower side. He also further contended that amount of compensation awarded on other heads are meager. Hence prayed for enhancement of compensation. 14. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently contended that claimant has not examined author of the salary certificate, hence it is not proved, therefore the Tribunal rightly considered the notional income of the claimant. The Tribunal has also assessed disability on the basis of materials available on record. 15. Respondent No.2 further contended that PW2 is not a treated doctor and he has given exorbitant disability and hence his evidence cannot be considered. The amount - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5840 MFA No. 101666 of 2019 of compensation awarded under other heads are just and reasonable and do not call for any interference by this Court. With these reasons prayed to dismiss the appeal. 16. The following questions arise for determination. “Whether the Tribunal has awarded just compensation and interference in the said finding is required?” 17. The finding of the Court on the above said question is partly in the affirmative for the following reasons. 18. Facts of the accident and claimant sustained injury in the said accident are not seriously challenged. There is no appeal by the respondents on the said issue by the Tribunal. 19. As per the medical records, claimant sustained fracture of tibia and fibula of the right leg. PW2 who is not a treated doctor, stated that the claimant has been suffering from permanent disability to an extent of 40% to the left lower limb. The Tribunal took 1/3rd of the same and assessed disability at 13% to the whole body. Looking to the nature of work, age of the claimant and difficulty - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5840 MFA No. 101666 of 2019 stated by him as well as PW2, permanent disability affecting earning capacity of the claimant could be taken as 15% to the whole body. 20. Admittedly claimant has not examined author who has issued salary certificate. Claimant according to his case is working as mason. There is no substantial evidence to believe that he was earning Rs.18,000/- per month. Therefore on the basis of notional income his income has to be determined. As per chart prepared by KSLSA, income of the victim of an accident of the year 2017 could be considered as Rs.10,250/- per month. The same could be applied to the facts of the present case. 21. It is not in dispute that applicable multiplier is 15 and the age is 40 years. On the above said calculation compensation is to be re-calculated under the heading loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability. 22. Looking to the materials available on record, in the impugned judgment amount of compensation was awarded under other heads is on the lower side. Claimant had sustained two fractures of both the bones of left leg - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5840 MFA No. 101666 of 2019 having deformities. It may not be possible for him to attend to the regular work atleast for six months and lost his earning during laid up period. The amount of compensation under the head of attendant charges, conveyance charge etc. are on lower side, it needs enhancement. 23. For the aforesaid discussions, compensation is re-calculated and following amount of compensation is awarded. Pain and suffering :Rs. 40,000.00 Medical expenses :Rs. 39,000.00 Future loss of earning :Rs.2,76,750.00 Loss of earning during laid up period :Rs. 61,500.00 Conveyance,attendant charges,nourishment :Rs. 20,000.00 Loss of amenities :Rs. 30,000.00 Total :Rs.4,67,250.00 24. The claimant is entitled for enhanced amount of compensation of Rs.1,31,250/- rounded off to Rs.1,32,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. It is not in dispute that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly liable to pay the said amount. Respondent No.2 being the insurer shall deposit the said amount. - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5840 MFA No. 101666 of 2019 25. For the aforesaid discussions, above question is answered partly in the affirmative and this Court proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed. ii. The impugned judgment and award dated 27.02.2019 passed in MVC No.2584/2017 by the XI Addl.Distrist and Sessions Judge and Addl. MACT, Belagavi is modified. iii. Claimant is entitled for enhancement of Rs.1,32,000/- in addition to the amount awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of petition till realization. iv. Respondent No.2 shall deposit the said enhanced amount with interest, within a period of six weeks from the date of drawing of the award. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:5840 MFA No. 101666 of 2019 v. Deposit and release of the amounts are as ordered by the Tribunal. vi. Send back the TCR along with copy of this judgment. vii. Draw award accordingly. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE KGK Ct:vh List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43