- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37018 MFA No. 3511 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 7147 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3511 OF 2019 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7147 OF 2019 (MV-I) IN MFA No. 3511/2019 BETWEEN: NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED DIVISIONAL OFFICE, REGIONAL OFFICE 144, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, 2ND FLOOR, M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001 NOW REPRESENTED BY ASST. MANAGER LEGAL &APPELLANT (BY SRI. ASHOK N. PATIL.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SUNIL S/O THAMMANNA, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.131, V.S.S.N ANNURU, KARKAHALLI VILLAGE, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT. Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37018 MFA No. 3511 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 7147 of 2019 SRI. D C NANJUNDAIAH S/O LATE CHIKKAMARIGOWDA, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS., 2. SUNANDAMMA, W/O LATE D C NANJUNDAIAH, 3. MADHU S/O LATE D C NANJUNDAIAH, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT DODDARASINAKERE VILLAGE AND POST, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V. SHASTRI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. NARENDRA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.01.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.56/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, MADDUR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.1,12,618/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN MFA NO. 7147/2019 BETWEEN: SRI SUNIL S/O SRI THAMMANNA AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS R/AT NO.131, V.S.S.N ANNURU, KARKAHALLI VILLAGE, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37018 MFA No. 3511 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 7147 of 2019 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHRIPAD V SHASTRI .,ADVOCATE) AND: SRI D C NANJUNDAIAH S/O LATE CHIKKAMARIGOWDA, SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR.S 1. SUNANDAMMA W/O LATE D.C NANJUNDAIAH, 2. MADHU S/O LATE D.C NANJUNDAIAH, BOTH ARE RESIDING AT DODDARASINAKERE VILLAGE & POST, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT. 4. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO., LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.144, 2ND FLOOR, SUBHARAM COMPLEX, MG ROAD, BANGALORE - 01. ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK N. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R3; VIDE ORDER DATED 18.07.2022, SRI. NARENDRA GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.01.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO. 56/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MADDUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37018 MFA No. 3511 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 7147 of 2019 ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT Both the matters are to be disposed of in one appeal, as both the appeals are filed against the same order. Hence, common order is passed in both the appeals. 2. MFA No.3511/2019 is filed by Insurance Company and MFA No.7147/2019 is filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 19.01.2019 passed in MVC No.56 of 2015, by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Maddur. 3. Heard the arguments of both the learned counsel. 4. The petitioner/injured claimant had filed petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him. The Trial Court considering the entire evidence on record, granted an amount of Rs.1,12,618/- with - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37018 MFA No. 3511 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 7147 of 2019 interest at the rate of 9% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization. It was also held that respondent Nos.1 to 3 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the amount within two months. Aggrieved by the said order, both the insurance company and claimant have preferred this appeal. 5. It is contended that driver of the insured vehicle does not have the valid and effective driving license and it was established by examining the RTO officer. The respondents also produced documents marked as Exs.R.1 to R.8. The offending vehicle is a Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) with a gross weight of 16200 kgs. However, the Tribunal relied upon the decision in 'Mukund Dewangan vs Oriental Ins.Co.Ltd 1 and fastened the liability on the insurance company, which is erroneous. It was held that the weight of the vehicle was below 7500 Kg. The petitioner had sustained only simple injuries and the rate of interest also requires modification. Hence, it is requested to allow the appeal. 1 2016 (4) SCC 298 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37018 MFA No. 3511 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 7147 of 2019 6. Ex.P.5 is the wound certificate and Ex.P.7 is the discharge summary. As per Ex.P.5, the claimant sustained the following injuries: "1. A lacerated wound on scrotum measuring 15 X 20 cm, exposing testes. 2. Abrasion on anterior surface abdomen measuring 15 X 10 cm." Out of which, the injury No.1 is grievous in nature and the injury No.2 is simple in nature. As per Ex.P.7-discharge summary, the claimant was diagnosis with: "1. Sciotal avulsion injury and liver laceration. 2. Multiple fracture right hip bone. L/E: i. A degloving injury over the scrotum exposing both testicles and penile urethra. ii. Laceration over glans penis. iii. Abrasion 2 X 2 cm over anterior part of both legs below knee joint. iv. Tenderness + at right hip joint." - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37018 MFA No. 3511 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 7147 of 2019 7. It was observed by the Tribunal that, as per Ex.P.7- discharge summary and other medical records corroborated by PW.2, the petitioner was aged 22 years as on the date of accident and the multiplier to be taken as '18'. It was noted that he was doing agriculture and dairy farming, earning Rs.10,000/- per month. However, he did not filed any income proof. The petitioner met with an accident on 22.09.2014. PW.2 was examined only to mark the medical records. As per Ex.P.7, the petitioner was admitted as an inpatient on 22.09.2014 and discharged on 09.10.2014 and was inpatient for 17 days. It is stated that the accident occurred in the year 2014. As per the guidelines of the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the petitioner's notional income is to be taken at Rs.8,500/- per month. There is no dispute with regard to the medical expenses awarded at Rs.50,618/-, which needs no interference by this Court. Considering the nature of injuries and the period of hospitalization, this Court finds it reasonable to enhance the compensation towards 'pain and suffering' to Rs.40,000/- and towards 'loss of amenities' to Rs.25,000/-. Since the petitioner might not have attended to any work for at least a period of four months due to the injuries sustained, this Court - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37018 MFA No. 3511 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 7147 of 2019 finds it reasonable to award Rs.34,000/- (Rs.8,500 x 4) under the head 'loss of income during the laid-up period'. This Court also finds it reasonable to enhance a sum of Rs.30,000/- under the head 'transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges'. 8. Thus in all, components awarded by this court are as below, 9. Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total enhanced compensation of Rs.1,79,618/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 10. In the result, the following order is passed: Particulars Amount in Rs. Medical expenses 50,618.00 Pain and suffering 40,000.00 Loss of amenities 25,000.00 Loss of income during laid up period 34,000.00 Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 30,000.00 Total 1,79,618.00 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37018 MFA No. 3511 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 7147 of 2019 ORDER i. The appeals are allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 19.01.2019 passed in MVC No.56/2015, by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Maddur, is modified; iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,79,618/- along with interest at 6% p.a as from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.1,12,618/- granted by the tribunal. iv. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that offending vehicle was a Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) and driver of the vehicle has no valid driving licence. The appellant-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount within one month from the date of this order and it is at liberty to recover the same from owner of the vehicle by due process of law. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37018 MFA No. 3511 of 2019 C/W MFA No. 7147 of 2019 v. On such deposit, petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 75