- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4964 MFA No. 101621 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MFA NO. 101621 OF 2018 (MV-I) BETWEEN: YASHODHA W/O. LATE BALEKERAPPA, AGE ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCC: PATTANA PANCHAYATH EMPLOYEE, R/O. SHIKARIPURA VILLAGE, TQ: SHIKARIPURA, NOW R/O. ANAJI VILLAGE-581210, TQ: HIREKERUR, DIST: HAVERI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. AMIT ANANDAHALLI, ADV. FOR SRI. S. G. KADADAKATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEVARAJNAYAK S/O. HIRENAYAK, AGE ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC: OWNER, R/O. HALEGUDDALLI-577427, TQ: SHIKARIPURA, DIST: SHIVAMOGGA. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD, MELAGIRI PLAZA, MCC BLOCK, DENTAL COLLEGE ROAD, DAVANAGERE-577002. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAJESH B. RAJANAL, ADV. FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 – SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF M.V ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN M.V.C NO.124/2011 ON THE FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT, HIREKERUR AND MODIFIED AND ENHANCING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.03.2018, PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, AND AMACT, HIREKERUR, IN M.V.C NO.124/2011 BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4964 MFA No. 101621 of 2018 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA) 1. This appeal is filed by the appellant – claimant against the judgment and award dated 2nd March 2018 passed in MVC No.124 OF 2011 by the Senior Civil Judge & AMACT, Hirekerur (for short “the Tribunal”) seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. For sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. It is the case of the claimant that, on 30.08.2008 at about 6:30 p.m, when she was traveling as a passenger from Masur to Anaji Village in an Auto bearing registration No.KA-27/8431 met with an accident near Yattinahalli cross, due to the rash and negligent driving of another auto bearing registration No.KA-17/A-1973 by its driver. As a result of which the claimant sustained grievous injuries and spent Rs.50,000/- towards medical expenses and she has suffered permanent disability due to the accident. For these - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4964 MFA No. 101621 of 2018 reasons, she prayed to award compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. 4. Respondent No.2 being the insurer filed the written statement denying the contents of the claim petition. It is further contended that the liability is restricted to the terms and conditions of the policy of insurance and holding of the valid and effective driving licence by the driver of the offending vehicle. It is also contended that the accident had taken place due to the negligence of the driver of the auto bearing registration No.KA-27/8431. In the alternative, it is contended that the driver of both the autos were negligent in driving their respective vehicles. Owner and insurer of the auto bearing registration No.KA-27/8431 are necessary party. On these grounds, it sought dismissal of the claim petition. 5. Based on the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues for its determination. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4964 MFA No. 101621 of 2018 6. To prove the case, the claimant examined herself as PW1 and also examined the Doctors as PW2 and PW3 and got marked 37 documents at Exs.P1 to P37. On the other hand, respondents examined RW1 and RW2 and got marked 7 documents at Exs.R1 to R7. 7. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties and on appreciating the entire evidence available on record, held that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the auto bearing registration No.KA-17/A-1973 by its driver. Further, the Tribunal by the impugned judgment and award, partly allowed the claim petition awarding compensation of Rs.43,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization of the amount. The Tribunal awarded compenation on the following heads: 1. Pain and suffering Rs.10,000/- 2. Medical expenses Rs.3,000/- 3. Diet, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges Rs.15,000/- 4. Loss of income during laid-up period -NIL- 5. Loss of future income on account of permanent physical disability -NIL- 6. Loss of amenities and enjoyment of life Rs.15,000/- TOTAL Rs.43,000/- - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4964 MFA No. 101621 of 2018 8. Being aggrieved by the inadequte amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant - claimant submits that, the Tribunal has not appreciated the evidence property and awarded meager amount of compensation and no amount of compensation is awarded toward loss of future income on account of permanent physical disability though PW2 in his evidence has stated that the claimant had suffered permanent disability to an extent of 20% and 45% to the particular limb. He further contended that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is inadequate. Hence, he seeks for enhancement of compensation. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4964 MFA No. 101621 of 2018 11. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 vehemently contends that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and the claimant has been working in Pattan Panchayat Office and she has been drawing salary even after the accident. Therefore, she would not be entitled to any compensation towards loss of future income on account of permanent physical disability. Accordingly the Tribunal rejected the same. There are no reason to interfere with the said finding. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the appeal. 12. The facts of the accident, the manner in which the accident had taken place and the claimant sustained the injuries in the accident are not in dispute. Respondents have not challenged the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. Hence, the only question that would arise for consideration is “whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation?” 13. The said question is answered partly in the affirmative for the following reasons: - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4964 MFA No. 101621 of 2018 14. The claimant has sustained fracture of left lateral condyle of the tibia bone and fracture of the upper third of the fibula bone, which was treated conservatively. She had also sustained other simple injuries noted in the wound certificate. The Tribunal considered the medical bills produced by the claimant and awarded an amount of compensation in a sum of Rs.3,000/- towards medical expenses, which does not call for any interference. The amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads are highly inadequate, which needs to be enhanced. No amount of compensation is awarded towards loss of income during laid-up period on the ground that the claimant has been serving in the Pattan Panchayat Office and according to the evidence of PW1, she applied leave for 30 days while undergoing treatment. Therefore, she lost income for a period of one month. 15. For the aforesaid discussion, following amounts of compensation are recalculated as under: - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4964 MFA No. 101621 of 2018 1. Pain and suffering Rs.60,000/- 2. Medical expenses Rs.3,000/- 3. Diet, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges Rs.25,000/- 4. Loss of income during laid-up period Rs.5,000/- 5. Loss of future income on account of permanent physical disability -NIL- 6. Loss of amenities and enjoyment of life Rs.50,000/- TOTAL Rs.1,43,000/- Less: the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs.43,000/- Enhanced compensation Rs.1,00,000/- 16. The claimant is entitled to the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. 17. It is not in dispute that respondent No.1 is the owner and respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending auto bearing registration No. KA-17/A-1973 and both are liable to pay compensation to petitioner jointly and severally. 18. For the aforesaid discussions, this Court pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 2nd March 2018 passed in MVC No.124 OF 2011 by - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4964 MFA No. 101621 of 2018 the Senior Civil Judge & AMACT, Hirekerur is modified. (iii) The appellant – claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization, on the enhanced amount of compensation. (iv) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the compensation amount before the Tribunal within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (v) The remaining portion of the order passed by the Tribunal is not disturbed. (vi) The Registry to send a copy of this judgment forthwith to the Tribunal. (vii) The Registry to draw award accordingly. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE VNP / CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 35