- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:423 MFA No. 6648 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6648 OF 2023 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI.RAMESH S S/O.SIDDA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/AT JAVANAMMANADODDI VILLAGE MALAGALU POST, KANAKAPURA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 117 …APPELLANT (BY SRI.PRAKASH M H.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE NEW INDIA ASS.CO. LTD., OFFICE AT NO 9, 2ND FLOOR, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001 REP BY ITS MANAGER 2. SRI VENKATE GOWDA K .C, S/O CHIKKATHIMME GOWDA MAJOR, R/AT NO 74, KORAMANGALA MAIN VILLAGE, KORAMANGALA BENGALURU - 560 068 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.A.N.KRISHNA SWAMY.,ADVOCATE FOR R-1; NOTICE TO R-2 IS DISPENSED WITH V.O.D 09.10.2023) THIS MFA FILED IS U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS ON THE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN MVC Digitally signed by GAVRIBIDANUR SUBRAMANYA GUPTA SREENATH Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:423 MFA No. 6648 of 2023 NO. 1192/2021 AND TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 06.01.2023 AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSIION, 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 & award dated 6th January 2023 passed in MVC No.1192/2021 on the file of the Court of Small Causes & Member, MACT, Bengaluru ('the Tribunal' for short). This appeal is founded on the premise of inadequate and meager compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: On 26th January 2021 at about 5.45 p.m., the claimant was riding motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-42-K-1397 from Kanakapura towards Channapatna carefully and cautiously and when he reached near Allimaranahalli village, Kasaba Hobli, Kanakapura taluk, Ramanagara district, at that time, driver of the Milk Canter - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:423 MFA No. 6648 of 2023 MGV bearing No.KA-51-A-1099 came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant. Due to the impact of the accident, the claimant fell down and sustained grievous injuries and he was immediately shifted to Kanakapura Government hospital and then to Sanjay Gandhi hospital, where he took treatment as in-patient for nearly 15 days. It is stated that the claimant was doing agriculture work and earning Rs.25,000/- per month. Due to the injuries suffered in the road traffic accident, he was not able to do work as he was doing prior to occurrence of the accident. In view of the injuries suffered and the expenses incurred, claimant filed the claim petition seeking compensation. 2.1 On service of notice, respondent No.2 - insurance company filed the written statement denying the claim of the claimant. Respondent No.1 remained absent and he was placed exparte. 2.2 On the basis of the pleadings, the Tribunal framed the relevant issues for consideration. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:423 MFA No. 6648 of 2023 2.3 In order to substantiate the issues and establish the case, the claimant got examined himself as PW.1 and doctor as PW.2 and got marked Ex.P1 to Ex.P14. On the other hand, respondents did not lead any evidence nor produced any documents in support of their case. 2.4 Upon consideration of the materials placed on record, both oral and documentary, the Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.5,02,700/- with interest at 6% per annum (excluding for the compensation awarded towards future medical expenses) and liability is fixed on Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and directed Respondent No.2 – insurance company to pay the compensation within two months from the date of the judgment. 2.5 Being aggrieved by the inadequate compensation awarded, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:423 MFA No. 6648 of 2023 3. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant - claimant as well as learned counsel for the respondent - insurance company. 4. It is the contention of learned counsel for the appellant – claimant that the disability of the claimant assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side and contrary to the opinion expressed by the doctor and the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the heads of 'loss of future income' and 'future medical expenses' are on the lower side and marginal enhancement is required under these heads. Therefore, learned counsel seeks to allow the appeal and enhance the compensation. 5. Per contra, learned counsel representing the insurance company opposed the argument putforth by learned counsel for the appellant – claimant. He contended that the doctor opined that the claimant suffered 21% disability to the left hand and therefore, the Tribunal rightly assessed the whole body disability to be 7% (i.e., one-third of 21%). He further contended that in - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:423 MFA No. 6648 of 2023 the absence of proof of income, the Tribunal rightly taken the income of the claimant to be Rs.15,000/- per month as per the Legal Services Authority Chart. He further contended that the Tribunal awarded just and reasonable compensation under all the heads and there is no error, illegality or perversity in the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. Lastly, learned counsel contends that infact the compensation awarded is on the higher side, however, the insurance company has not filed any appeal. On these grounds, he seeks for dismissal of the appeal. 6. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and on perusal of the impugned judgment & award and the materials placed on order, it is seen that there is no dispute with regard to occurrence of the accident, involvement of the vehicle and injuries suffered by the claimant. But the dispute is only with regard percentage of disability. In the present case, PW.2 - doctor opined that the claimant suffered 21% permanent physical - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:423 MFA No. 6648 of 2023 disability to the left hand. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, duration of treatment and other aspects, the Tribunal rightly assessed the whole body disability to be 7% (i.e., one-third of left lower limb disability) and awarded Rs.1,89,000/- towards 'loss of future income due to disability', which does not call for interference. 7. On the basis of oral and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal awarded just and reasonable compensation under all the heads, which does not warrant interference at the hands of this Court. Under the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the well reasoned judgment rendered by the Tribunal. 8. Accordingly, I pass the following: O R D E R i) The appeal stands dismissed. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:423 MFA No. 6648 of 2023 ii) The impugned judgment & award dated 6th January 2023 passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.1192/2021, is sustained. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE GSS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43