- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MFA NO. 102457 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: MANJUPRIYA D/O. ASHOK HATTIHOLI, AGE 24 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, R/O. ANAND APARTMENTS, A/7, II MAIN, 9TH CROSS, SADASHIV NAGAR, BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. A.B. NESARAGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. PRADEEPA D/O. SUNDARMOORTHY, AGE MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. O.N.1/168, N.N.1/257, BHARTI NAGAR, M. PIDARIYUR, INGUR ROAD, CHENNIMALAI, PERUNDURAI TK-638052. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, RAMDEV GALLI, BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. ANUSHA SANGAMI, ADV. FOR SRI. S. K. KAYAKMATH, ADV. FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 - SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 15.07.2015, PASSED IN MVC.NO.2150/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MEMBER ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-V, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA) 1. This appeal is filed by the claimant against the judgment and award dated 15th July 2015, passed in MVC No.2150 of 2013 by the IV – Additional District and Sessions Judge and Member MACT-V, Belagavi (for short “the Tribunal”) seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. For sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are as under: It is the case of the claimant that, on 05.06.2013 at about 19:00 hours, the claimant along with her colleague were returning from Ghataprabha G.J. Co-op. Hospital to Belagavi in a car bearing registration No.KA-22/P-5971. It met with an accident near Hattargi Bus Stand, due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry bearing registration No.TN-56/1531 by its driver. As a result of which the - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 inmates of the vehicle sustained both simple as well as grievous injuries. The claimant suffered a displaced fracture of mid-shaft of humerus (left side) and also the fracture of neck of humerus (left side). She had taken treatment in KLE Hospital at Belgavi as an inpatient, and has been suffering 30% disability due to the injuries. At the time of accident, she was aged about 22 years and was a student studying Chartered Accountancy. Due to injuries she has been suffering from personal disability. With these reasons, she sought for compensation of Rs.15,00,000/-. 4. Respondent No.1 being the owner of the offending lorry did not appear before the Tribunal and he was placed ex-parte. Respondent No.2 – Insurer appeared through its advocate and filed its objections denying the allegations made in the petition and it has contended that its liability is restricted to the terms and conditions of the policy of insurer and holding of valid and effective driving licence, at the time of the accident, by the driver of the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 offending lorry and on these grounds, it sought dismissal of the claim petition. 5. Based on the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues for its determination: “1. Whether the petitioner proves that he / she has sustained bodily sustained bodily injuries in the motor vehicle accident that occurred on 05.06.2013 at about 19:00 hours on NH 4, near Hattargi Bus Stand, within the limits of Yamakanamaradi Police Station on account of rash and negligent driving of Truck bearing registration No.TN-56/1531 by its direver? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, what is the quantum and from whom? 3. Whether the petition suffers from non joinder of necessary parties as contended in para No.6 of the written statement of respondent No.2? 4. What order or award? 6. The Tribunal recorded the evidence of the claimant in this case as well as in the connected MVC cases i.e., MVC Nos.2151/2013 to 2153/2013. 7. To prove the case, the claimant examined herself as PW1 and got marked 24 documents at Exs.P1 to P24 and - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 closed her evidence. Respondent No.2 got marked one document as per Ex.R1. 8. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties and appreciating the entire evidence available on record, held that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry by its driver. Further, the Tribunal by the impugned judgment and award, partly allowed the claim petition awarding compensation of Rs.2,10,545/- along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of its deposit, on the following heads: 1. Future loss of earning due to disability Rs.64,800/- 2. Pain and suffering Rs.20,000/- 3. Loss of amenities Rs.10,000/- 4. Medical expenses Rs.95,745/- 5. Food and nourishment Rs.10,000/- 6. Conveyance and other sundry expenses Rs.10,000/- TOTAL Rs.2,10,545/- 9. The Tribunal assessed the loss of future earnings due to disability by taking the income of the claimant at Rs.3,000/- per month, applied the multiplier of 18 based on - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 the age of the claimant as 22 years as on the date of accident and also taken permanent disability at 10% i.e., 1/3rd of the evidence given by the Doctor – PW4. 10. Being aggrieved by the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 11. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 12. The facts of the accident and the claimant sustained the injuries in the accident are not in dispute. Respondent No.2 has not challenged the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. Hence, the only question that would arise for my consideration is “whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation?” 13. my answer to the said question is partly in the affirmative for the following reasons: - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 Learned counsel for the appellant submits that, the date of accident is 05.06.2013 and the Tribunal has taken the income of the claimant at Rs.3,000/- per month and as per the income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (KSLSA), the notional income of a victim for the relevant period shall be assessed at Rs.7,000/- p.m. the said submission is tenable. The national income of the claimant shall be taken as Rs.7,000/- p.m. 14. PW4 – Doctor, in his evidence, has deposed that the claimant underwent surgery and an iron rod was fixed at the left humerus and it needs to be removed by undergoing another surgery, for which the learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal had not awarded any amount of compensation towards future medical expenses. He further submits that the amounts of compensation awarded under other heads is also inadequate and seeks enhancement. 15. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents supported the impugned judgment and - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 award and submitted that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is proper and it does not call for any interference by this Court. 16. Income of claimant is taken as Rs.7,000/- p.m. as discussed above. Her age was 22 years at the time of accident and hence suitable multiplier applicable is 18. disability assessed by the Tribunal is 10% and looking to the evidence, it is proper. On that basis compensation under the head loss of future income is recalculated. 17. In view of reassessment of income the compensation on some of the heads also to be recalculated. Looking to the injuries, treatment taken etc., the compensation awarded on other heads are inadequate which needs enhancement. 18. For the aforesaid discussion, following amounts of compensation are recalculated as under: 1. Future loss of earning due to disability (Rs.7,000/- x 12 x 18 x 10%) Rs.1,51,200/- 2. Pain and suffering Rs.30,000/- 3. Loss of amenities Rs.25,000/- 4. Medical expenses Rs.95,745/- - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 5. Food and nourishment Rs.20,000/- 6. Conveyance and other sundry expenses Rs.10,000/- 7. Future medical expenses Rs.30,000/- TOTAL Rs.3,61,945/- Less: The compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs.2.10.545/- ENHANCED COMPENSATION Rs.1,51,400/- 19. The claimant is entitled to the enhanced compensation of Rs.1,51,400/-. 20. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 – Insurer submits that the Tribunal has awarded interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit, which is on the higher side and submits that atleast on the enhanced amount of compensation, interest at 6% p.a. be awarded. 21. Submission of the learned counsel for respondent No.2 needs consideration. 22. For the aforesaid discussions, this Court pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 (ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 15th July 2015 passed in MVC No.2150/2013 by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge and Member MACT-V, Belagavi is modified. (iii) The appellant – claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,51,400/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization, on the enhanced amount of compensation. (iv) Respondent – Insurer is directed to deposit the compensation amount before the Tribunal within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (v) The enhanced amount of compensation is meager and the claimant is a student studying Chartered Accountant and therefore the entire enhanced amount of compensation is ordered to be released in her favour on proper identification. - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4274 MFA No. 102457 of 2015 (vi) The Registry to send back the Trial Court Records (TCR) forthwith to the Tribunal. (vii) The Registry to draw award accordingly. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE VNP / CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6