- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1093 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: THE BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, P.B. NO.123, CHANNAGIRI ROAD, BHADRAVATHI. BY UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, AKKAMAHADEVI ROAD, M M K COMPLEX, P.J. EXTENSION, DAVANGERE, BY ITS MANAGER. &APPELLANT (BY SRI. O. MAHESH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT. CHANDRAMMA, AGE 38 YEARS, W/O LATE MYLARAPPA, R/O MALAPPANAHATTI VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK & DISTRICT - 577 501. 2. B.M. ASHOK AGED 30 YEARS, S/O MAHANTHESHAPPA, R/O NO. 373, BELAGATTA-2, HIGH SCHOOL, BELAGATTA-2, CHITRADURGA TALUK & DISTRICT - 577 501. Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 3. RAMAMANI AGED 58 YEARS, W/O LATE BRAMHAKUMAR, R/O NO.23, 7TH DIVISION, LALITAMBA TEMPLE, SADASHIVAPPA HOUSE, TEACHERS ROAD, MUNCIPAL COLONY, CHITRADURGA - 577 501. &RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.S. BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 10.02.2015, NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 6.11.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.298/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, C.J.M, MACT-3, CHITRADURGA, AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.6,52,750/- WITH INTEREST @ 6% P.A FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by Insurer challenging the judgment and award dated 06.11.2014 passed by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM and MACT-III, Chitradurga (for short 'Tribunal) in MVC No.298/2012. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per the ranking before the Tribunal. 3. The brief facts of the case are as under: On 07.01.2012, the petitioner was going by walk in front of Sai Medicals in JCR Extension, Chitradurga at around 9.30 a.m., at that time, the rider of the motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-14-Y-9895 rode his vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and hit the petitioner. As a result, she sustained fracture of left femur and she took treatment in government hospital, Chitradurga. She underwent surgery and spent more than Rs.1,50,000/- towards medical expenses, Rs.20,000/- towards taxi charges, Rs.7,000/- towards attendant charges. 4. It is further case of claimants that at the time of accident, she was aged about 35 years and earning a sum of Rs.5,700/- per month. Due to injuries sustained in the accident, she has suffered permanent disability. With - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 these reasons, the claimant has prayed to award compensation of Rs.6,70,000/-. 5. Before the Tribunal, the respondent No.3 - Insurance Company, denied the contentions of the claimant. It is contended that it is not liable to pay the compensation and prayed to dismiss the petition. 6. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues for its determination. 7. The claimant to prove her case examined six witnesses as PWs.1 to 6 and marked 133 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-133. Respondents have not let-in oral evidence, but marked one document as Ex.R-1. 8. The Tribunal after hearing the parties and appreciating the oral and documentary evidence available on record, passed the impugned judgment and award - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 dated 06.11.2014 holding that the accident was caused due to negligence of the rider of the motor cycle. 9. Tribunal has assessed the age of the petitioner as 37 years, her income as Rs.5,000/- per month, added 50% of her monthly income towards the future prospects as per the principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh and others vs. Rajbir Singh and others reported in 2013 ACJ 1403 and applied the multiplier as 15. The Tribunal has assessed the permanent disability of the whole body as 15% and awarded following amount of compensation. Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and sufferings 60,000-00 Treatment expenses 85,250-00 Permanent disability (25% of Rs.7,500x12x15x15%) 3,37,500-00 Loss of income during treatment and laid up period (5000 x 8 months) 40,000-00 Attendant charges 40,000-00 Nourishment 30,000-00 Future treatment 30,000-00 Loss of amenities/comforts 30,000-00 Total 6,52,750-00 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 10. Heard the arguments from both sides and perused the materials placed before this Court. 11. Learned advocate for Insurer contends that the assessment of income and disability are on higher side. The Tribunal grossly erred in adding 50% of income towards future prospects, in this case, though disability suffered by her was assessed as 15% to whole body. The amount of compensation awarded are on the higher side. He further submits that when the compensation is awarded under the head 'loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability', claimant is not entitled to compensation under the head loss of amenities, said law is laid down by the coordinate bench of this Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited, Bangalore vs. Vasantha Kumar and Another reported in Karnataka Law Journal 2010(2) Page 477. Hence, prayed to recalculate the compensation. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 12. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that on the basis of available material on record, the Tribunal has awarded a just and reasonable amount of compensation which does not call for any interference and prays to dismiss the appeal. 13. The occurrence of the accident and the injuries sustained by the claimant is not disputed. Therefore, there is no need to reconsider the same. 14. I have perused the materials available on record anxiously. The point that arise for consideration are as follows: i) Whether the Tribunal has awarded a just and reasonable amount of compensation ? Point No.1: 15. Claimant was aged about 35 years. She has sustained fracture of left femur and other injuries. According to her contention, she was earning a sum of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 Rs.5,700/- per month, which is not on the higher side. Even as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authorities, in the absence of any proof of income for the accident of the year 2012, the notional income of the claimant may be taken as Rs.7,000/- per month. However, the claimant has not challenged the same. Accordingly, the notional income of Rs.5,000/- per month taken by the Tribunal is not exorbitant. 16. Claimant has been suffering from permanent disability, according to PW6 and Ex.P6, the disability is at 45% to the lower limb. Normally, if the disability is converted to the whole body, it shall be 1/3rd of lower limb. Looking at the age and fracture sustained by the claimant, the permanent disability is reassessed at 10% instead of 15% taken by the Tribunal. Tribunal has added 50% of the income towards future prospects. She is said to be serving as house nurse and house keeping and she has not disclosed as to how the disability of 10% to whole - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 body will affect to her future prospects, adding income of 50% towards future prospects is not proper. In a few judgments, Hon'ble Apex Court followed that of disability is more than 50% to whole body, further prospects was considered, looking to facts of each case. Tribunal has taken the age of the claimant as 35 years, however, while applying the multiplier, it is mentioned as 15 instead of 16. It needs correction. 17. Para 16(c) - In the judgment reported in Kar.LJ 2010(2) Page 477, there is no discussion about denying the compensation under the heading 'loss of amenities' of compensation is awarded under the head 'loss future earning capacity'. Compensation awarded under the head loss of future earning capacity due to disability is for the loss of further income due to restriction of movements to do the work more efficiently, that may affect the earnings of a victim of an accident. And due to such injuries a victim of an accident may not lead normal life. He may - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 have to suffer physical pain at the injured limb or unable to do routine work properly apart from the employment. For example in the present case, the victim petitioner may not be able to run, brisk walk, lift heavy luggage/weight etc., since she sustained fracture of femur. These discomforts are not considered while awarding compensation under the head 'loss of future earning capacity'. As it relates exclusively to the functional disability to earn. Hence, said contentions of the appellant is not tenable to deny the compensation under the head 'loss of amenities', when compensation is awarded under the head 'loss of future earning capacity'. 18. On re-appreciation of the material on record, the claimant is entitled to following compensation: Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and sufferings 50,000-00 Treatment expenses 85,250-00 Loss of income due to Permanent disability Rs.5000x12x16x10%) 96,000-00 Loss of income during treatment and laid up period (5000 x 3 months) 15,000-00 - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 Special diet, attendant charges and conveyance charges 30,000-00 Future Medical Expenses 30,000-00 Loss of amenities/comforts 40,000-00 Total 3,46,250-00 19. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,46,250/- as against Rs.6,52,750-/- awarded by the Tribunal. The claimant is also entitled for the interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Undisputedly, respondents are liable to pay the same. 19. In view of the above discussion, I answer above point in favour of appellant/Insurer and pass the following:- ORDER i) Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 06.11.2014 passed by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM and MACT-III, Chitradurga, is hereby modified. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22054 MFA No. 1093 of 2015 iii) The claimant is entitled to the compensation of Rs.3,46,250/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till its realization as against Rs.6,52,750/- awarded by the Tribunal. iv) Respondent No.3/Insurer shall deposit the said amount within six weeks from the date of award. v) Release and deposit of the amount are as ordered by the Tribunal. vi) Whatever the amount deposited by the Insurer shall be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement to claimant. vii) Registry is directed to transmit the records along with copy of this judgment to the Tribunal forthwith. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE SNC List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11 CT: BHK