- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7874 MFA No. 101175 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101175 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SHRISHAIL @ SHRISHAILAPPA S/O GURUSIDDAPPA GANIGER, AGE: 56 YEARS, OCC: FOOD GRAINS BUSINESS, NOW NIL, R/O: UPPINBETAGERI, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD. … APPELLANT (BY SRI. HANAMANT R. LATUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VIJAYKUMAR G. PUJARI, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF PRIVATE MARUTI 800 BEARING NO.KA-22/M-0697, R/O: C/O: BHIMAPPA Y. UDOJI, TADAKOD, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., LEA COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR, NEAR CORPORATION OFFICE, DHARWAD-8. 3. CHANDRAGOWDA S/O BASANAGOWDA JATTINAGOWDAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF HMT TRACTOR, R/O: TIMMAPUR, POST: MAREWAD, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD. 4. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., SAVITRI SADAN, OPPOSITE TO KITTEL COLLAGE, P.B. ROAD, DHARWAD. Digitally signed by MALLIKARJUN RUDRAYYA KALMATH Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7874 MFA No. 101175 of 2015 5. PRABHU S/O MAHANTAPPA KASHIGAR, AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O: GARAG, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD. … RESPONDENTS (R1 TO R4-DISPENSED WITH; R5-NOTICE TO HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 05.03.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.237/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE FAST TRACK COURT AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, DHARWAD. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 05.03.2015, passed by the Fast Track and Additional M.A.C.T., Dharwad (for short ‘the Tribunal’,) in MVC No.237/2011, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. Heard the arguments and perused the material placed before the Court. 3. The occurrence of accident, injuries sustained by the claimant, coverage of insurance are not in dispute in this case. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7874 MFA No. 101175 of 2015 4. In the present case, from the medical evidence on record it is proved that the claimant had suffered the grievous injuries i.e., comminuted fracture of lower 3rd of left femur and comminuted fracture of upper 1/3rd tibia and fibula of right leg with fracture of Talus. 5. The tribunal has awarded compensation under various heads as under: Sl. No. Heads. Amount in (Rs.) 1. Pain and suffering Rs.50,000/- 2. Loss of amenities and future unhappiness Rs.50,000/- 3. Medical expenses incurred Rs.80,121/- 4. Incidental expenses Rs.10,000/- 5. Loss of income during laid up and rest period Rs.20,000/- 6. Compensation towards loss future income Rs.99,000/- 7. Future medical expenses. Rs.20,000/- Total: Rs.3,29,121/- 6. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, compensation awarded by tribunal is lesser side. Therefore, the same is required to be enhanced by modifying the judgment and award. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7874 MFA No. 101175 of 2015 7. The accident is caused on 04.06.2010. The claimant was an food grains merchant. Income proof is not produced. Therefore, in the absence of proof of income, notional income of Rs.5,500/- per month is to be taken into consideration for the accident year 2010, which is recognized by the Karnataka State Legal Service Authority. The claimant was aged 52 years at the time of accident. Therefore, appropriate applicable multiplier is 11. 8. The doctor has stated that the claimant has suffered 24% permanent physical disability towards limb, but the Tribunal has taken only 15%. Therefore, taking note of the same, it is just and proper to re-assess the functional disability of the claimant at 20% to the whole body, considering that the claimant was working as food grains business. Accordingly as per the age group mentioned in National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and others, reported in (2017) 16 Supreme Court Cases 680, and as per the Division Bench judgment of this Court in New India Assurance Company Vs. Abdul S/o Mehaboob Tahasildar in MFA No.103807/2016 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7874 MFA No. 101175 of 2015 C/w. MFA Nos.103835/2016 & 103807/2018 and as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sidram vs. Divisional Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited and another reported in (2023) 3 SCC 439, even in the case of injuries, certain income is to be added towards loss of future prospects in life. Thus, considering the age of the claimant, 10% of the income is to be added towards loss of future prospects. 9. Hence, loss of future income due to disability is hereby reassessed and quantified as Rs.1,59,720/- (Rs.5,500 + 10% (future prospects) x 20% (disability) x 11 (multiplier) x 12. Further, a sum of Rs.33,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during laid up period for a period of six months (Rs.5,500/- x 6 months). 10. Considering the injuries sustained, a compensation of Rs.65,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities are awarded. The compensation awarded towards medical expenses and hospital charges of Rs.80,121/- is as per the actual bills and - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7874 MFA No. 101175 of 2015 receipts produced; therefore, the same is kept intact. Further, Rs.35,000/- towards incidental expenses like food, nourishment, traveling, attendant charges, etc., is awarded. Further, considering the nature injuries suffered by the claimant, Rs.20,000/- awarded by the tribunal towards future medical expenses is kept intact. 11. Thus, the claimant is entitled for total compensation under various heads as under: Sl. No. Heads. Amount in (Rs.) 1. Towards injuries, pain and suffering. 65,000 2. Towards medical expenses. 80,121 3. Towards loss of amenities. 50,000 4. Towards loss of income during laid up period 33,000 5. Towards incidental charges like attendant charges, food, nourishment, conveyance, etc. 35,000 6. Towards loss of future earning capacity. 1,59,720 7. Towards future medical expenses. 20,000 Total: 4,22,841 12. Therefore, the claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.4,22,841/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition till - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7874 MFA No. 101175 of 2015 realization, as against Rs.3,29,121/- awarded by the Tribunal. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. 13. The Tribunal has awarded interest on the compensation at 9% per annum, which is on the higher side. Considering the rate of interest awarding on the fixed deposits, this Court is awarding interest at the rate of 6% per annum. 14. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated 05.03.2015, passed by the Fast Track and Additional M.A.C.T., Dharwad, in MVC No.237/2011 stands modified. iii) The claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.4,22,841/- along with - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7874 MFA No. 101175 of 2015 interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization as against Rs.3,29,121/- awarded by the Tribunal. iv) The insurance company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. v) Registry to send back records to the concerned tribunal along with a copy of this judgment. vi) No order as to costs. vii) Draw award accordingly. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE RHR/- CT:BCK LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 2 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7874 MFA No. 101175 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD [SHRISHAIL @ SHRISHAILAPPA VS. VIJAYKUMAR G. PUJARI AND OTHERS] 18.07.2025 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING) CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORDER ON ‘MEMO FOR BEING SPOKEN TO’ This Court, vide order dated 20.06.2025, has disposed off the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant files a memo for being spoken to stating that there are typographical errors in the order at page Nos.7 and 8. In page No.7 at second line, rank of the party is wrongly typed as ‘insurance company’, but it ought to have been typed as ‘respondent No.5’. Accordingly, it is corrected and paragraph No.12 of the judgment shall be read as under: 12. Therefore, the claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.4,22,841/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the petition till realization, as against Rs.3,29,121/- awarded by the Tribunal. The ‘respondent No.5’ is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation within eight weeks - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:7874 MFA No. 101175 of 2015 from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Further, in the operative portion of the judgment in page No.8 at Clause-iv, it is typed as the ‘insurance company’, but it ought to have been typed as ‘respondent No.5’. Accordingly, it is corrected and Clause-iv of the judgment shall be read as under: iv) The ‘respondent No.5’ shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. This order shall be read as part and parcel of the order dated 20.06.2025. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE RKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1