- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.202144 OF 2024 (MV-I) BETWEEN: G MADHU S/O ERANNA AGE 36 YEARS, OCC:HAMALI IN APMC R/O.#12-1/360/637, JALALM NAGAR DIST. RAICHUR, TQ. & DIST. RAICHUR. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. PATIL SHANTABAI SUBHASH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. YERUVA @ NARASAREDDY YERUVA S/O. Y CHINNA NARASIMHA REDDY AGE: MAJOR, OCC. OWNER OF LORRY REGN. NO.AP-21/TA-5529 R/O.H.NO.11-87-60/1, OPP. CURRENT OFFICE CHAGALA MARRI DISTRICT KURNUL, STATE ANDHRA PRADESH-518001. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER BHARATIYA AXA GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD NO.45/1, THE RESIDENCE SHANTHALA NAGAR ASHOKA NAGARA, Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 BENGALURU-560037 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MANJUNATH MALLAYYA SHETTY, ADV. FOR R2; V/O. DATED 13.06.2025, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.09.2023, PASSED BY THE PRL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MACT AT RAICHUR, IN MVC NO.517/2021 AND PLEASED TO CALL FOR TRIAL COURT RECORDS AND PLEASED TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AND PLEASED TO FASTEN WHOLE LIABILITY ON RESPONDENT NO.2 INSURER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF) This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation arising out of judgment and award dated 04.09.2023 in MVC No.517/2021, passed by Principal District and Sessions Judge and MACT, at Raichur (for short, ‘the Tribunal), on contributory negligence and inadequate compensation. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 2. The date of accident, involvement of vehicle and injuries suffered by Sri G. Madhu are not in dispute. The dispute involved in this appeal is to the extent of 10% contributory negligence saddled on the injured/claimant by the Tribunal as well as on quantum of compensation. 3. Heard Smt. Patil Shantabai Subhash, learned counsel appearing for the appellant – claimant, Sri Manjunath Mallayya Shetty appearing for the respondent No.2 – Insurance company. Vide order dated 13.06.2025, notice of this appeal on respondent No.1 is dispensed with. 4. Smt. Patil Shantabai Subhash taking this Court through the judgment and award has vehemently submitted, that, FIR was registered against the driver of the lorry and the Police subsequent to completion of investigation filed charge-sheet against the driver of the lorry for the offences punishable under the provisions of Indian Penal Code. However, the Tribunal fastened the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 liability of 10% towards contributory negligence on the injured while answering issue No.1 in affirmative wherein only rash and negligence driving by the driver of the lorry was the issue. She has further submitted that in the absence of records to the contrary produced by the insurance company, the Tribunal fastening contributory negligence at 10% on the injured is uncalled for and the said finding required to be interfered with by this Court. 5. Smt. Patil Shantabai further submitted that compared to the injuries, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. The appellant has sustained fracture of pubic rami as well as fracture of femur of left leg. The doctor who has been examined as P.W.2 has clearly stated before the Court after subjecting the injured to clinical examination, that the appellant is suffering from 60% of disability to the whole body. The Tribunal has taken the same at 50%, however, the Tribunal has not considered future prospects when disability suffered is more than 20%. In these - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 circumstances, the compensation awarded under different head except medical expenses requires re-consideration and re-determination. Accordingly, sought to allow the appeal on these two grounds. 6. Refuting the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant – claimant, Sri Manjunath Mallayya Shetty with all vehemence submits that though the Tribunal has answered issue No.1 in affirmative, as per spot sketch, the injured when he is about to cross the road abruptly, the accident has taken place. Though the driver of the truck tried to avoid the accident, but for sudden appearance of injured, the same was unavoidable. The Tribunal having taken note of the same ought to have saddled contributory negligence of more than 10%, however, has taken the contributory negligence at 10%, which does not call for any interference. 7. Sofar as enhancement of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal appropriately taken the income for the year 2021 fixed by the Karnataka State Legal Services - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 Authority at Rs.14,250/- and awarded appropriate compensation under all the heads and the same does not suffer from any infirmities and accordingly supports the judgment and sought to dismiss the appeal. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the entire appeal papers so also trial Court records, the points that would arise for our consideration are: 1. Whether the Tribunal has committed any error in fastening 10% contributory negligence on the injured? 2. Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal befit within the expression ‘just compensation’? 9. Our answers to the above points for consideration are as under: Point No.1: In Negative Point No.2: Partly in Affirmative for the following; - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 REASONS 10. Point No.1 It is the case of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-claimant that the incident has taken place while the injured was crossing the road. The injured was very cautious regarding the on coming vehicle, while coming the road, but it is the driver of the vehicle who was rash and negligent in driving the vehicle caused the accident and thereby the Tribunal has committed serious error in fastening liability of 10% contributory negligence on the injured. However, the learned counsel for the insurance company has submitted that the spot sketch clearly shows that the injured was a jaywalker suddenly appeared on the road, the spot where the injured was crossing the road not meant for crossing. Neither it is a zebra cross nor a medial space between road median to cross the road. The injured was a jaywalker without observing any traffic rules suddenly proceeded to cross the road. In these circumstances, the accident has taken place which was not under the control of the driver. The - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 Tribunal having taken note of the fact visible in the spot sketch, fastened contributory negligence at 10%, which is just and proper and does not call for any interference. 11. This Court, is order to find out the truth has through gone to the spot sketch as well as spot mahazar. We find force in the arguments articulated by learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 that the accident’s spot was just besides the median on the road. The injured in haste while crossing the road abruptly proceeded on the road which had resulted in accident causing injuries. In these circumstances, we find no infirmities on the finding of the Tribunal fastening 10% contributory negligence on the injured. As such, the point No.1 is answered in negative and against the appellant/claimant. 12. Point No.2: Before adverting to this issue, it is necessary to look into the injuries suffered by the claimant. As per Ex.P.3, the appellant has suffered the following injuries: - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 “1. Deformity present in the Lt thigh region (apparent shortening) 2. Tenderness present in right thigh region 3. Tenderness present in lower part of abdomen 4. Degloving wound present on Lt thigh 38x4 cm 5. Tenderness over lower back. Investigations: 1. CT No.638 dated 31.08.2021 CT Pelvis 2. Chest Xray A.P No.1449 dated 07.09.2021. I am of the opinion that above mentioned injuries were grievous in nature. “ 13. The doctor who has been examined as P.W.2 issued disability certificate at Ex.P.9, the disability issued at Ex.P.9 is reproduced by us for easy reference, which reads as under: “DISABILITY CERTIFICATE This is to certify that I have examined Mr. Madhu S/o Eranna aged 46 years, Male Patient, resident of Raichur, on 16-09-2022 to assess his disability which followed after a road traffic accident on 30-08-2021. He is a labour by occupation now no work. On examination of the injury certificate and discharge summary issued at RIMS hospital Raichur, where patient was treated and he had following injuries of; - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 1) Crush injury of right thigh with degloving injury 2) Bilateral superior and inferior pubic rami fracture. Patient complaints of difficulty in walking with one lower limb, sitting cross legged and run on normal ground and uneven surfaces, he is unable to do forward bending, squatting or to do his routine activities as earlier. On clinical examination of his left lower limb; There is tenderness at the Right SI joint region, there is restricted right hip joint movements which are painful, The range of motions of right hip are 0- 30 degrees, the abduction is 0-10 degrees, adduction is 0-10 degrees, flexion of the hip is 0- degree active and further 0 degree passive is present but painful and restricted. The extension of right hip is 0 degree. Patient is unable to sit cross legged or squat on the floor. There is tenderness present over hamstring muscles. There is minimal wasting of quadriceps muscles present. Patient walking on crutches, Movements around right knee are completely absent patient is unable to walk properly both on the normal surface and uneven surface. Right ankle joint has developed stiffness moments around right ankle are 0 degrees. There is loss of proprioception is decreased to 4/5 compared to opposite side He finds it difficult to climb the stair case, he is unable to sit for long. Movements around left hip are also painful and restricted. On examination of xray-142727 of Pelvis with both hips AP, left Femur full length AP and lateral and Right Femur full length AP and lateral shows; there is evidence of SI joint fusion right side, there is arthritis of left hip joint, uniting - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 femur fracture with nail in situ, left sacroiliac joint fusion with pelvic tilt present. I am of the opinion that the above findings will render him a Permanent disability of 60 percent (Sixty percent) to the extent of the whole body.” 14. As per the disability certificate and the evidence of P.W.2, the injured suffered disability at 60% to the whole body. The Tribunal has considered at 50% the same relied is just and proper. The injured was working as a Hamali in APMC, now as per his evidence, he is not doing any work. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Jithendran vs. New India Assurance Company Limited and another1 has considered future prospects to be added to the existing income. Considering the disability and the age of injured being 46 years, the claimant is entitled for 25% future prospects to the existing income fixed under the Chart i.e., Rs.14,250/- p.m. Having taken note of the disability suffered, the compensation awarded under each head except medical expenses, attendant, nourishment and transportation are on the lower side. The same 1 (2022) 15 SCC 620 - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 requires re-consideration and re-determination. Accordingly, we proceed to re-determine the compensation as follows: Heads of compensation Amount Pain and suffering : Rs. 1,50,000/- Loss of amenities and pleasures : Rs. 1,50,000/- Medical attendant’s and nourishment expenses : Rs. 50,000/- Loss f income during laid up period (Rs.14,250 x 6) : Rs. 85,500/- Loss of future income (14,250 +25% x 12 x 13 x50/100) : Rs. 13,89,375/- Medical expenses and future medical expenses 50,000/- Conveyance expenses 20,000/- TOTAL : Rs. 18,94,875/- 15. Accordingly, the claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.18,94,875/- as against Rs.12,62,475/-, awarded by the Tribunal. The enhancement comes to Rs.6,32,400/- which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered partly in affirmative. - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 16. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part; ii) The judgment and award dated 04.09.2023 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge and MACT, at Raichur in MVC No.517/2021 is hereby modified; iii) The appellant/claimant is entitled for an enhanced compensation of Rs.6,32,400/- which shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization; iv) The respondent No.2 – Insurance company shall deposit 90% of the enhanced compensation along with accrued interest stated supra before the concerned Tribunal - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:5237-DB MFA No. 202144 of 2024 within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order; v) After deposit, 70% of the deposited amount with accrued interest be kept in any nationalized bank in an interest bearing FDR for a period of five years. The bank shall not permit any loan on the said fixed deposit without an order from the concerned Tribunal/Court. vi) Balance 30% of the amount along with accrued in interest shall be released in favour of appellant/injured on proper identification. vii) No order as to costs. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE BL, LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 53, CT:JLR