- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15388 MFA No. 102391 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102391 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. BUJABALI S/O. LAXMAN NYAMAGOUD, AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, NOW NIL, R/O. TAKKOD, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MALATESH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. HARISH S. MAIGUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SUNIL S/O. MALLAPPA NYAMAGOUDA, AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. TAKKOD, TQ: JAMAKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, RAMDEV GALLI, BELAGAVI. 3. VENKATESH S/O. DAMODAR SHETTY, GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15388 MFA No. 102391 of 2015 AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: OWNER, R/O. KENI ANKOLA, TQ: ANKOLA-581314, DIST: KARWAR (NORTH CANARA). 4. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., JUBLIEE CIRCLE, OPP. ICICI BANK, P.B. ROAD, DHARWAD. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVINDRA R. MANE, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. S.S. JOSHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S. ARANI, ADVOCATE FOR R4; NOTICE TO R1 & R3 SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.536/2011, ON THE FILE OF THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.XI, JAMAKHANDI AT: JAMAKHANDI DATED 07.03.2015, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15388 MFA No. 102391 of 2015 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Sri Harish S. Maigur, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri S.S.Joshi, learned counsel for respondent No.2 as well as Sri Rajashekhar S. Arani, learned counsel for respondent No.4. 2. Being aggrieved by the sum that is awarded as compensation by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-XI, Jamakhandi through orders in MVC 536 of 2011 dated 07.03.2015, the claimant therein preferred the present appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the tribunal having assessed the age of the appellant as 40 years by the date of accident ought to have adopted multiplier ‘15’ as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15388 MFA No. 102391 of 2015 another1, but it applied ‘12’ as multiplier. Learned counsel further submits that the tribunal took the notional income of the appellant as Rs.4,500/- per month, but for the relevant period, the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad is taking the ‘notional income’ as Rs.5,500/- per month and at least said figure should have been considered by the tribunal. Learned counsel further submits that the tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.4,500/- only towards ‘loss of earnings during laid up period’, but the appellant having sustained injury to his back bone took treatment for a long period. 4. The submission that is made by learned counsel for respondent No.2 is that the award of the tribunal can be modified with marginal enhancement. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 submits that respondent No.4 is exonerated from liability. 6. It is not in dispute that the appellant sustained grievous injury to D6, D7, D8, D9 and D10 vertebra, apart 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15388 MFA No. 102391 of 2015 from injuries to chest wall, right knee joint and clavicle. The tribunal having considered the totality of evidence, took the disability in respect of whole body as 5%. In respect of notional income, the tribunal ought to have taken the same as Rs.5,500/- per month. Also as rightly contended by learned counsel for the appellant, the appropriate multiplier to be applied is ‘15’. Thus the appellant received lesser sum as compensation under the head ‘loss of future earnings’. Equally, the amount awarded as compensation towards ‘loss of earning during laid up period i.e. Rs.4,500/- is on lower side. Therefore this Court is of the view that the compensation that is granted by the tribunal if enhanced globally by Rs.50,000/-, the same will meet the ends of justice. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-XI, Jamakhandi through orders in MVC 536 of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15388 MFA No. 102391 of 2015 2011 dated 07.03.2015 is enhanced by Rs.50,000/-. (iii) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. (iv) Failure to deposit the amount within the time granted will result in payment of interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. (v) On deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE EM CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 56