- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 241 OF 2021 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6168 OF 2021 (MV-I) IN MFA No. 241/2021 BETWEEN: THE MANAGER M/S ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD MYTHRI ARCADE, IST MAIN, NEW KANTARAJ URS ROAD, SARASWATHIPURAM, MYSURU NOW REP. BY ITS MANAGER, M/S ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.121, THE ESTATE, 9TH FLOOR, DICKENSON ROAD, M G ROAD, BENGALURU -560 042 …APPELLANT (BY SRI.S.KRISHNA KISHORE .,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. PUTTASWAMY N S/O LATE NANJEGOWDA, NOW AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.D7, INFRONT OF JAYALAKSHMI TALKIES, 5TH CROSS, ARAKESHWARA NAGAR, Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 GUTHALLU COLONY, MANDYA CITY 2. D C RAMEGOWDA S/O CHENNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT DEVARAHALLI VILLAGE, CHIKKA ARASIKERE HOBLI, MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT, PRESENTLY R/AT HOUSE NO.2948, SRI SIDDEHWARA NILAYA, NEAR BESAGARAHALLI RAMANNA CIRCLE, 7TH CROSS, ASHOKA NAGARA, MANDYA CITY (OWNER OF MARUTI SUZUKI 800 CAR REG NO.KA-11-M-1583) … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M.NAGESH.,ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI.PALAPPA., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.RAJASHEKAR.K., ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 08.01.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.1088/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANDYA, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.37,87,900/- WITH INTEREST AT 8 PERCENT P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL PAYMENT OF ENTIRE AMOUNT. IN MFA NO. 6168/2021 BETWEEN: PUTTASWAMY N S/O LATE NANJEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT D NO.7 IN FRONT OF JAYALAKSHMI TALKIES 5TH CROSS, ARAKESHWARANAGARA GUTHALLU COLONY - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 MANDYA CITY-571 401 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. NAGESH M.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. D C RAMEGOWDA S/O CHANNEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, R/AT DEVARAHALLI VILLAGE CHIKKA ARASIKERE HOBLI MADDUR TALUK MANDYA DISTRICT PRESENT R/AT HOUSE NO.2948 SRI SIDDESWARA NILAYA NEAR BESARAGARAHALLI RAMANNA CIRCLE 7TH CROSS ASHOKANAGARA MANDYA CITY-571 401 (OWNER OF MARUTHI SUZUKI 800 CAR BEARING REGN NO.KA-11-M-1583) 2. THE MANAGER ICICI LOBARD GENERAL INSRUANCE CO LTD MYTHRI ARCADE IST MAIN NEW KANTHARAJ URS ROAD, SARASWATHIPURAM MYSURU -570 001 (POLICY NO.3001/MI/03544466/00/000 VALIDITY FROM 15-03-2016 TO 14-03-2016) ... RESPONDENTS BY SRI.PALAPPA., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.RAJASHEKAR.K., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI.S.KRISHNA KISHORE., ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE 1ST ADDL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, MANDYA IN MVC NO. 1088/2017 DATED 05.01.2020 AND TO ALLOW THE CLAIM PETITION FILED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE ABOVE SAID CASE AS PRAYED IN THE CLAIM PETITION. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 THESE APPEALS ARE, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD) These appeals are against the Judgment and Award dated 08.01.2020 in M.V.C. No.1088/2017 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and C.J.M, Mandya [for short, "the Tribunal"]. The appeal by the Insurer is in M.F.A. No.241/2021, and the appeal by the claimant is in M.F.A. No.6168/2021. The parties, for reasons of convenience, are referred to as the Claimant and the Insurer with the owner of the insured vehicle being referred to as the Owner. 2. The Tribunal has granted the claimant a total sum of Rs.37,87,900/- under the following heads along with interest at 8% per annum. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 Sl. No. Heads Amount in Rs. 1 Pain and Suffering 60,000 2 Medical Expenses 16,43,400 3 Loss of Future earning 13,80,600 4 Loss of Income during laid up period 2,12,400 5 Loss of Amenities 25,000 6 Food, nourishment and conveyance 3,16,500 7 Future Medical Expenses 1,50,000 Total 37,87,900 3. According to the claimant, on 06.06.2016 at 03:30 p.m., on the way back to his village, when he, sitting on his parked motorcycle, was talking to over mobile, the Insured Vehicle – a Maruti car, which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner, hit him and he has suffered fractures in the left and right lower limbs. The Insurer has admitted the policy but has denied that the driver of the Insured Vehicle was rash or negligent. The Insurer has also denied the involvement of the vehicle. The Tribunal, while examining the Issue whether the claimant proves that the accident was because the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 driver of the Insured vehicle was rash and negligent, has found that the accident was indeed because this driver was rash and negligent concluding that it cannot be opined that the vehicle was not involved in the accident merely because complaint is lodged two days from the date of the accident. The Tribunal has relied upon the Police investigation. 4. The owner has examined himself as RW1, and he has stated in his chief examination that he was slow and cautious in driving the car but the claimant, who was talking over his mobile while riding the motorcycle, lost control and fell into a canal resulting in injuries to him. However, when it is suggested to him in the cross-examination that his dirver has pleaded guilty in the criminal proceedings and he has suffered a penalty, he pleads ignorance. 5. Mr. S. Krishna Kishore, the learned counsel for the Insurer relying upon the owner's evidence as aforesaid and an entry in the medical - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 record that the claimant had parked his bike on the road and was talking to somebody on his mobile sitting on such bike, proposes to contend that the Tribunal could not have fastened the entire liability on the Insurer and some negligence ought to have been attributed to the claimant. Mr. M. Nagesh, the learned counsel for the claimant, and Mr. Palappa, the learned counsel for the owner, are heard on this ground. 6. This Court must opine that the Insurer and the owner are not consistent in their defence. If the owner proposes to assert that the claimant was talking on his mobile while riding and he hence fell into a canal, the Insurer proposes to rely upon an entry in the medical records to say that the claimant was negligent in parking the vehicle on the road and talking to somebody on his mobile. This contradictory case is examined in the light of the Police investigation. Further what emerges as indisputable - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 is that the owner has accepted that his driver has pleaded guilty in the criminal proceedings. Neither of the contradictory defences can overwhelm the outcome of the investigation by the Police. Therefore, this Court finds that there is no reason for interference with the Tribunal's finding on this score. 7. Mr. S. Krishna Kishore next submits that this Court must interfere with the compensation granted by the Tribunal towards loss of future earning and in this regard, the learned counsel points out that the Tribunal has awarded such amount accepting the medical evidence that the claimant has a disability of 25% and based on the Income tax Returns [ITR]. The learned counsel asserts that the assessment of functional disability is exaggerated and that ITR does not show that the claimant has suffered any loss of income. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 8. As against these submissions, Mr. M. Nagesh canvases that [i] the claimant has suffered right femur posterolateral subluxation [Dislocation] with global instability and left supracondylar fracture of the femur [just above the knee joint], [ii] he has had to undergo surgeries requiring fixator for healing of both the fractures and [iii] he, who is a contractor and who runs a brick kiln, has suffered a functional disability resulting in loss of earning capacity, and therefore, the Tribunal has taken the income and the percentage of disability correctly. The learned counsel also canvasses that the Tribunal has erred in not granting an addition towards Future Prospects. 9. The records are perused in the light of the rival submissions. The Doctor, who has treated the claimant is examined as PW2. The Doctor, while describing the injuries suffered as afore-mentioned and the procedure that the claimant has undergone, - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 has opined that the fracture of the left femur is mal- united and that the claimant suffers from instability and severe arthritis in the right knee. The Doctor has also referred to certain disfiguration and scar stating that the claimant will have difficulty in squatting and attending to his work otherwise. The Doctor has assessed 25% permanent disability because of these circumstances. 10. This Court opines that the loss of future earning must be decided based on the claimant's proven vocation and the permanent physical disability that he has suffered. The Insurer does not dispute that the claimant was a contractor and running a brick kiln1. The claimant has also been elected a member of Maddur Taluk Panchayat. In which event, the assessment of functional disability at 25% is not excessive. The next question for 1 The Claimant has marked Contractor’s Passbook [Ex. 645] and the General License to run a Brick Kiln and Receipt [Ex. 662]. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 consideration is whether the claimant has suffered a loss of ability to earn income. The claimant, as a contractor, has lost earning capacity in proportion to the loss of functional disability. 11. The claimant, to establish his vocational income has produced ITRs [Exb.P667 to Exb.P669] relevant to the Assessment Years 2015-16, 2016-17 and 2017-18. The Tribunal, on examination of these Returns, has opined that the claimant has suffered a loss of income in the sum of Rs.4,24,070/- based on the returns filed just before the accident and thereafter. The Tribunal has observed that the claimant’s income before the date of accident [06.06.2016] was Rs.7,36,110/- as per ITR for the AY 2015-16, which is filed on 31.10.2015 and that his income for the year AY 2017-18, which is filed on 06.09.2017, is Rs.3,12,040/-. The Tribunal has taken the difference between these two sums for - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 computing loss of future earning taking the actual income. 12. This Court once again opines that this has not resulted in any irregularity in computing compensation, but the Tribunal should have provided for an addition towards future prospects because the evidence is that there is mal-union of the fracture of left femur and the claimant has suffered arthritis in the right knee because of supracondylar fracture of the femur. The claimant was aged 47 as of the date of the accident. The addition towards future prospects must be at 25% of the income that is taken for computation. If the loss of future earning capacity is computed with these parameters, it would be in a sum of Rs.17,25,750/- as against the sum of Rs.13,80,600/- awarded by the Tribunal. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 Details of Computation of Loss of Future Earning Capacity Monthly Income [Rs.4,24,100.00/12 Rs.35,400/-2 Addition towards Future Prospects 25% Monthly Income + Future Prospects Rs.44,250/- Annual Income Rs.5,31,000/- Percentage of Disability 25% Multiplicand [Based on percentage of Disability] Rs.1,32,750/- Multiplier 13 Loss of Earning Capacity Rs.17,25,750/- 13. Mr. M. Nagesh argues that this Court must grant a higher compensation than Rs.25,000/- towards loss of amenities, but this Court is not persuaded because the compensation under the other heads, including the compensation towards future medical expenses do offset any shortfall that could be under this head. The comparative table of 2 The amount of Rs.4,24,000/- and Rs.35,400/- are rounded off figures. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and enhanced by this Court reads as under. Description By the Tribunal By this Court Pain and Suffering Rs.60,000/- Rs.60,000/- Medical Expenses Rs.16,43,400/- Rs.16,43,400/- Loss of Future Income Rs.13,80,600/- Rs.17,25,750/- Loss of Income during laid up period Rs.2,12,400/- Rs.2,12,400/- Loss of Amenities Rs.25,000/- Rs.25,000/- Food, Nourishment and Conveyance Rs.3,16,500/- Rs.3,16,500/- Future Medical Expenses Rs.1,50,000/- Rs.1,50,000/- Total Rs.37,87,900/- Rs.41,33,050/- Enhanced Rs.3,45,150/- The Tribunal has awarded 8% as against 6% per annum and it is settled law that exceptional circumstances must be brought about to justify a higher rate of interest, and no such circumstances are established. In the light of the afore, the following: - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 ORDER The appeals are allowed in part and the Judgment and Award dated 08.01.2020 in M.V.C. No.1088/2017 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and C.J.M, Mandya is modified in the following terms: [i] It is held that the claimant is awarded a total sum of Rs. 41,33,050/- with enhancement in a sum of Rs.3,45,150/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition to the date of the deposit. [ii] The amount in deposit in these appeals shall be transmitted to the Tribunal for immediate disbursal and the further amount that is required to be deposited shall be deposited within eight [8] weeks. - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24540-DB MFA No. 241 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6168 of 2021 [iii] The Registry is directed to transmit the records. SD/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SD/- (G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE RB