- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37016 MFA No. 6242 of 2017 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. 6242 OF 2017 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. SIDDARAJU S/O NAGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/AT CHIKKABORE GOWDANA DODDI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHANTHARAJ K, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VIJAYA N. HEGDE W/O SRINIVAS, AGE MAJOR, R/AT NO.12/117, AGRAHARA, THYAGARAJA ROAD, CHAMARAJANAGAR - 573 313. 2. THE MANAGER SRIRAMA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.3/5, MONARK, CHURCH BUILDING, 3RD FLOOR, INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK KUMAR N, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 12.01.2018, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37016 MFA No. 6242 of 2017 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.06.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.227/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AND MACT, RAMANAGARAM, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 14.06.2017 passed in MVC No.227/2011, by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM and Additional M.A.C.T., Ramanagaram, for enhancing the compensation. 2. Heard the arguments of both the learned counsel. 3. The petitioner/injured claimant had filed petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.7,50,000/-. The Trial Court considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.50,000/- with interest at the rate - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37016 MFA No. 6242 of 2017 of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant was aged about 23 years and was doing agriculture, dairy farming and flower vending business, earning Rs.15,000/- per month and that due to the accidental injuries, he has suffered permanent disability. 5. To prove his case, the appellant before the Tribunal examined PW.1 and PW.2 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.7. PW.2 assessed the disability as 14.2% to the lower limb and there is a malunion of fracture of left tibia with implant insitu and thus he requires Rs.25,000/- for removal of the implant. However, the Tribunal, without considering the same, granted only Rs.50,000/-. The appellant has also spent Rs.60,000/- towards medical expenses, but no amounts are granted under the other heads, he further requests for enhancement of the interest to 12% instead of 6%. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37016 MFA No. 6242 of 2017 6. As per Ex.P.4, the wound certificate and the evidence of PW.2, he has sustained fracture of right tibia, which is grievous in nature. PW.2 further stated that the petitioner was complaining of pain in the left knee and ankle on standing for more than half an hour and on walking more than two kilometers, difficulty in squatting in left lower limb. PW.2 assessed the disability at 14.2% PPI of the lower limb. Ex.P.6 is the disability certificate and Ex.P.7 is the X-ray. Though petitioner stated that he was earning Rs.15,000/- p.m., he has not produced any document to prove his income. As he met with an accident on 05.05.2011, this Court finds it reasonable to take his notional income as Rs.6,500/- per month, as per the guidelines issued by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. As he was aged 23 years, the multiplier is to be taken as '18'. Considering 1/3rd of 14.2% i.e., 5% disability, the 'loss of future income' is assessed at Rs.70,200/- (6,500 X 12 X 18 X 5%). - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37016 MFA No. 6242 of 2017 7. PW.2 stated that he had examined the petitioner on 23.03.2015. The petitioner was initially treated in District Hospital and was later shifted to ESI hospital, where he took treatment as an inpatient. Considering injuries sustained by him, this Court finds it reasonable to award Rs.20,000/- towards 'pain and suffering', Rs.20,000/- towards 'loss of amenities' and Rs.30,000/- towards 'transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges'. It is also reasonable to grant a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards 'medical expenses'. Since the petitioner might not have attended to any work for at least a period of three months due to the injuries sustained, this Court finds it reasonable to award Rs.19,500/- (Rs.6,500 x 3) towards 'loss of income during the laid-up period'. PW.2 further stated that the petitioner requires another surgery for removal of the implants, estimated to cost Rs.25,000/-. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to grant Rs.25,000/- towards 'future medical expenses'. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37016 MFA No. 6242 of 2017 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.1,94,700/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 10. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of future income 70,200.00 Pain and suffering 20,000.00 Loss of amenities 20,000.00 Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 30,000.00 Medical expenses 10,000.00 Loss of income during laid down period 19,500.00 Future medical expenses 25,000.00 Total 1,94,700.00 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37016 MFA No. 6242 of 2017 ii. The judgment and award dated 14.06.2017 passed in MVC No.227/2011, by Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM and Additional M.A.C.T., Ramanagaram, is modified; iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 1,94,700/- along with interest at 6% p.a as from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.50,000/- granted by the tribunal. iv. Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the amount within one month from the date of this order on such deposit and v. 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.: 53