- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4922-DB MFA No. 102241 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.102241 OF 2022 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SHRI MAHADEV S/O SHRIPATI MANE AGE. 37 YEARS, OCC. LABOUR (NOW NILL) R/O. HINDALGA, TQ. AND DIST. BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. UMESH C. AINAPUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI. MARUTI S/O. DADU KANASE AGE. MAJOR, OCC. TRANSPORT BUSINESS, R/O. NEAR MARATHI SHALA PARISAR HARIJAN SAMAJ MANDIR, NAVE PARAGAON, TQ. HATKANANGALE, DIST. KOLHAPUR, STATE MAHARASHTRA - 416317. (OWNER OF THE MILK TANKER BEARING REGN. NO. MH-09/BC-6309) 2. THE SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CTS NO.477/1, 1ST FLOOR, V.A.KALABURGI BUILDING, DESAI CROSS PINTO ROAD, HUBBALLI-580020. (INSURER MILK TANKER BEARING NO. MH 09/BC-6309) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. VITTHAL S. TELI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. NAGARAJ C. KOLLOORI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.03.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.2362/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT OF V ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER OF ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4922-DB MFA No. 102241 of 2022 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S G PANDIT) Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of both learned counsels, it is taken up for final disposal. 2. The claimant-injured is before this Court dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded under judgment and award dated 15.3.2021 in M.V.C. No.2362/2018 on the file of learned V Addl. District & Sessions Judge and Addl. MACT, Belagavi (for short, ‘Tribunal’), praying for enhancement of compensation. 3. The appellant/claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act before the Tribunal claiming compensation for the injuries sustained in a road traffic accident that occurred on 7.6.2018 involving Motorcycle bearing registration No.MH-09/CG-8545 and Milk Tanker bearing registration No.MH-09/BC-6309. It is stated that the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4922-DB MFA No. 102241 of 2022 appellant/claimant was aged about 28 years as on the date of the accident and he was doing coolie work, earning a sum of Rs.800/- per day. 4. On service of notice, respondent No.1/owner of the Milk tanker appeared through his counsel and filed statement of objections denying the entire claim petition averments. Respondent No.2/insurer appeared through its counsel and filed written statement denying claim petition averments contending that due to rash and negligent riding of rider of the motorcycle, the alleged accident took place. It was further contended that the driver of the Milk Tanker was not having valid and effective driving license. Thus, prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. 5. Before the Tribunal, the claimant examined himself as PW1 and examined two other witnesses as PW2 & PW3 apart from marking the documents as Exs.P1 to P33. Respondents did not examine any witness, but insurer marked insurance policy as Ex.R1. The Tribunal on appreciation of the material on record awarded a total compensation of Rs.11,06,529/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of realization. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4922-DB MFA No. 102241 of 2022 6. While awarding the above compensation, the Tribunal assessed the income of the claimant/injured at Rs.8,000/- per month, applied multiplier of 16 and assessed the disability of the injured at 20% to the whole body. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimant is before this Court praying for enhancement of compensation. 7. Heard Sri.Umesh C Ainapur, learned for the appellant and Sri.Nagaraj C Kolloori, learned counsel for respondent/Insurer and perused the appeal papers including original records. 8. Sri.Umesh C Ainapur, learned counsel for the appellant/claimant would submit that the income of the claimant assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.8,000/- per month is on the lower side, inasmuch as the claimant was doing coolie working and earning Rs.800/- per day. Hence, learned counsel prays for assessing the income of the claimant/injured on the higher side. He further submits that the Tribunal committed an error in assessing whole body disability at 20% as against the evidence of PW3-doctor, who opined that the injured/appellant has sustained permanent physical disability to an extent of 40% to the right lower limb, 30% to the left lower limb and - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4922-DB MFA No. 102241 of 2022 20% to the right upper limb. He further submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal on the other heads is also on the lower side. Thus, he prays for enhancement of compensation. 9. Sri. Nagaraj C Kolloori, learned counsel for the respondent/Insurer supporting the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal submits that in the absence of cogent material on record to establish the income of the injured/appellant, the Tribunal is justified in assessing notional income of the injured at Rs.8,000/- per month. Further, learned counsel submits that taking note of evidence available on record, the Tribunal awarded just and reasonable compensation under various heads, which needs no interference. Thus, he prays for dismissal of the appeal. 10. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the appeal papers including the original records, the only point that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether the appellant/claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation? - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4922-DB MFA No. 102241 of 2022 11. Our answer to the above point would be in the “affirmative” for the following reasons: The occurrence of the accident that took place on 7.6.2018 involving Motorcycle bearing registration No.MH- 09/CG-8545 and Milk Tanker bearing registration No.MH- 09/BC-6309, resulting in injuries to the claimant is not in dispute in this appeal. The claimant is before this Court praying for enhancement of compensation. It is the contention of the appellant/claimant that he was doing coolie work and earning a sum of Rs.800/- per day. The Tribunal assessed monthly income of the claimant at Rs.8,000/-. However, the claimant has not produced any cogent or acceptable material to establish that he was earning a sum of Rs.800/- per day. In the absence of any material on record to establish exact income of the appellant/claimant, this Court and Lok Adalath while settling the accidental claims of the year 2018, normally would assess notional income at Rs.11,750/- per month, taking note of the chart prepared by KSLSA based on various factors including the minimum wage fixed. In the instant case also, in the absence of any material evidence to establish the income of the injured, we are of the opinion that it would be just and - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4922-DB MFA No. 102241 of 2022 appropriate for us to re-determine the income of the injured at Rs.11,750/- p.m. taking note of the income chart prepared by KSLSA including the minimum wage fixed. 12. The claimant examined the treated doctor as PW3. PW3-doctor has issued Disability Certificate, which is marked as Ex.P16. As per Ex.P16-Disability Certificate, the claimant has sustained following injuries: a) Fracture of right femur; b) Fracture of left femur; c) Compound fracture right tibia & fibula; and d) Fracture right radius and ulna lower end. 13. PW3-doctor in his evidence has stated that he has observed the functional disability of the claimant and has opined that the claimant has reduction of right hand pinch, grip strength and restriction of both hip/knee/right wrist/forearm and ankle movements. On examination of clinical and radiological examinations coupled with Ex.P16-disability certificate, PW3-Doctor has opined that the claimant/injured has sustained permanent physical disability to an extent of 40% to the right lower limb, 30% to the left lower limb and 20% to the right upper limb. The Tribunal has assessed the functional disability of the claimant at 20%, which in our view is - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4922-DB MFA No. 102241 of 2022 on the lower side. Taking note of the fractures suffered by the claimant, duration of treatment taken by him and also evidence of doctor-PW3 coupled with Ex.P16-Disability Certificate, we deem it appropriate to re-assess the functional disability of the claimant at 40% to the whole body as against 20% assessed by the Tribunal. 14. There is no dispute with regard to the age of the claimant i.e. 33 years. The multiplier applicable to the age of the claimant is 16. Thus, the claimant would be entitled to compensation on the head of loss of earning capacity at Rs.9,02,400/- (Rs.11,750 X 12 (months) x 16 (multiplier) x 40/100 (disability). 15. Further, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.75,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.50,000/- towards loss of happiness and future amenities, Rs.50,000/- towards diet, attendant, conveyance and other incidental expenses and Rs.5,76,329/- towards medical expenses based on medical bills produced, which in our view is just and proper, requires no interference. Since the claimant was an inpatient in the hospital for more than 2 months on different occasions, we - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4922-DB MFA No. 102241 of 2022 deem it appropriate to award a sum of Rs.70,500/- on the head of loss of income during laid up period for six months. 16. Thus, the claimant would be entitled to modified compensation as under: Sl.No. Particulars Amount 1. Pain & suffering Rs. 75,000/- 2. Medical expenses Rs.5,76,329/- 3. Loss of earning capacity Rs.9,02,400/- 4. Loss of happiness and future amenities Rs. 50,000/- 5. Loss of income during laid-up period for three months Rs. 70,500/- 6. Diet, attendant, conveyance & other incidental expense. Rs. 50,000/- Total Rs.17,24,229/- 17. Thus, the claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.17,24,229/- as against Rs.11,06,529/- awarded by the Tribunal. 18. In the result, we pass the following order: ORDER a) The appeal is allowed in part. b) The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.17,24,229/- as against Rs.11,06,529/- awarded by the Tribunal. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4922-DB MFA No. 102241 of 2022 c) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till date of payment. d) Respondent/Insurer shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. e) Apportionment, deposit and release of the enhanced compensation shall be made as per award of the Tribunal. f) Registry to transmit the TCR to the concerned Tribunal forthwith. g) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (S G PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE JTR CT:VP LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 17