- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37794 MFA No. 4268 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4268 OF 2018 (MV-I) BETWEEN: K L SIDDAPPA S/O LATE LAKKAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O. KAMALAPURA VILLAGE, JAVAGAL HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT, PRESENTLY R/AT. BEHIND MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA, ARSIKERE TOWN- 573 103. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. JAGADEESH H T., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MADHU H K S/O. KALLESHAPPA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT HIRIYURU VILLAGE, BANAVARA HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK- 573103. 2. KALLESHAPPA S/O. HALASIDDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/AT. HIRIYURU VILLAGE, BANAVARA HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK - 573103. 3. THE MANAGER UNIVERSAL SOMOPO GENERAL Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37794 MFA No. 4268 of 2018 INSURANCE CO. LTD., C.T. TRADE CENTER, 1ST FLOOR, OPP. C.T. HOSPITAL, KHADRI, MANGALORE - 575003. 4. THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., SRI. MANJUNATHAESHWRA COMPLEX, BUS STAND ROAD, P.B. NO.112, HASSAN - 573201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R-3; SRI. B.C.SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-4; NOTICE TO R-1 AND R-2 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD 01.07.2025) *** THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.08.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.310/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT, ARSIKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS MFA, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed by the injured claimant against the impugned judgment and award dated 05.08.2017 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & AMACT, ARSIKERE, in M.V.C.No.310/2016. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37794 MFA No. 4268 of 2018 2. The plaint averments in brief are that, the injured claimant(appellant herein) met with an accident on 04.11.2014 at about 3:30 p.m., while he was coming from Banavara towards Arsikere on NH-206, on account of the rash and negligent driving of the Tractor and Trailer by its driver. Due to the impact, he sustained grievous injuries. 3. On account of the grievous injuries sustained by him, the injured claimant filed a claim petition before the Tribunal, seeking compensation of a sum of `15,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence available on file, allowed the claim petition awarding compensation of a sum of `3,65,827/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization from respondents. 4. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the injured claimant has filed the present appeal, in which it is contended that the amount awarded under the heads pain and suffering, loss of amenities, loss of income during laid up period, food and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37794 MFA No. 4268 of 2018 nourishment and medical expenses, is very meager and prayed for enhancement of compensation. 5. Heard the arguments from both sides. 6. To substantiate his case, the appellant examined himself as PW-1 and got marked 13 documents from Exs.P-1 to P-13. As per Ex.P-3 - Wound Certificate, he sustained the following injuries: 1. Deformity of right leg with bleeding from fracture end 2. Lacerated wound over right hand dorsem aspect 3. Deformity of left leg 4. Pain and tenderness over both sides of chest. 7. The Doctor (CW-1) has opined that the injury Nos.1 and 3 are grievous in nature and injury Nos.2 and 4 are simple in nature. Exs.P-10 to P-12 are marked through him for consideration of medical bills amounting to `4,53,254/-. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37794 MFA No. 4268 of 2018 8. It is stated that the appellant was aged about 59 years and working as an agriculturist. On account of the injuries and the disability sustained, he was hospitalized for a period of eight days from 11.5.2015 till 19.05.2015. The Doctor (CW-1) has stated in his evidence that the appellant has sustained fracture of femur condyle right patella, fracture acetabulam right, fracture left lateral condyle of tibia with tendon injury. The left knee and ankle movements are restricted. Similarly right hip and knee and ankle movements are restricted and painful. He is unable to lift weight and walk for long distance. He is unable to sit in a swatting position. He further stated that left knee and ankle movement was normal, but there was loss of movement. The combined value of the loss of ROM and loss of muscle strength has been assessed and extra points have been given for pain deformities, contracture, loss of sensation, shortening etc. Taking into consideration the clinical and radiological factors, the total - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37794 MFA No. 4268 of 2018 disability in respect of the left lower limb is given as 30% and right lower limb is 45%. 9. The Tribunal observed that the appellant (PW-1) has sustained comminuted fracture and underwent an operation and external fixators are put. Deformity and shortening of leg was also noticed. Following the Government guidelines and formula A+B (90-A)/90, while assessing the disability, the Doctor has taken into consideration the mobility and stability component, range of motion, loss of muscle strength, mean loss, extra points and other details contained in the guidelines. He has seen the check X-rays, the previous X-rays along with the case sheet. He has stated that the fractures have become mal-united. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to consider the disability at 25%, i.e. 1/3rd of 75%, as per the evidence of CW-1. 10. Though the appellant did no produce any evidence regarding his income, having regard to the year of occurrence of the accident, i.e. 2014, this Court finds it - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37794 MFA No. 4268 of 2018 reasonable to assess his income at `8,500/- per month as per the guidelines of the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. As on the date of accident, the appellant was aged 59 years and therefore the multiplier applicable is '9'. Thus, the loss of future income works out to `2,29,500/- (i.e. `8,500/-x12x'9'x25%) as against `1,13,400/- awarded by Tribunal. 11. This Court finds no reason to interfere with the compensation of `4,53,254/- awarded by Tribunal towards medical expenses. 12. Further, the compensation awarded towards pain and sufferings, loss of amenities and future medical expenses needs no interference by this Court. 13. So far as the compensation awarded towards conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges at `25,000/- (`15,000/-+`10,000/-) is concerned, the same is enhanced to `30,000/-. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37794 MFA No. 4268 of 2018 14. So far as the compensation awarded towards loss of income during laid-up period is concerned, considering the nature of injuries and the disability sustained, this Court finds that the appellant might not have attended to his work at least for a period of four months. Accordingly, the loss of income during laid up period works out to `34,000/- (i.e. `8,500/- x 4 months) as against `10,000/- awarded by Tribunal. 15. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to the modified compensation as under: Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by Tribunal (in `) Compensation awarded by this Court. (in `) 1 Pain and suffering 60,000-00 60,000-00 2 Medical expenses 4,53,254-00 4,53,254-00 3 Conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges 25,000-00 30,000-00 4 Loss of income during laid-up period 10,000-00 34,000-00 5 Loss of future earning capacity 1,13,400-00 2,29,500-00 6 Loss of amenities & enjoyment of life 20,000-00 20,000-00 7 Future medical expenses 50,000-00 50,000-00 Total: 7,31,654-00 50%=3,65,827/- 8,76,754-00 50%=4,38,377-00 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37794 MFA No. 4268 of 2018 16. The Tribunal has observed that the appellant is a tort-feaser who has also contributed to the extent, as such he is entitled to only 50% of the compensation. 17. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to compensation of ````4,38,377/- (50% of ````8,76,754/-) as against `3,65,827/- awarded by Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum, on the enhanced compensation. 18. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 05.08.2017 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & AMACT, Arsikere, in M.V.C.No.310/2016, is hereby modified, awarding compensation of ````4,38,377/- as against `3,65,827/- awarded by Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum, on the enhanced compensation. The third respondent - Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation with interest at 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37794 MFA No. 4268 of 2018 date of petition till the date of realization within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. I.A.No.1/2019 was filed to condone the delay of 203 days in filing the appeal. This Court by order dated 04.08.2025 condoned the delay, but there was no specific mention that the said period of delay was condoned without interest. Therefore, the insurance company cannot be exempted now for the said period. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Since the claim petition against respondent No.4 - Insurance Company is dismissed, they need not pay any amount. Draw the modified award accordingly. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE BMV* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19