- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15205 MFA No. 100438 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.100438 OF 2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SHRI YALLAPPA SATYAPPA PATIL, AGE: 31 YEARS, OCC: TILES FITTING WORK (NOW NIL), R/O. KAKATI, TALUKA & DIST: BELAGAVI-591113. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRANAV KATAGERI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SANJAY S. KATAGERI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI JINAPPA BHARMANNA GUNDAKALLI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: A/P: BHAGYANAGAR, SURPURKHERWAD, TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI-591106. (OWNER OF JOHN DEERE TRACTOR BEARING REGD NO.KA-23/TB-8701 & CHAMUN TRAILER REGD. NO.KA-23/TC-2478 & KA-23/TC-2479) 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15205 MFA No. 100438 of 2020 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, PRABHU BUILDING, RAMDEV GALLI, BELAGAVI-591002, (INSURER OF THE TEMPO BEARING IS REG.NO.KA-20/N-1461) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. IRANAGOUDA K. KABBUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO THAT THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.10.2019 IN MVC NO.2322/2016 PASSED BY THE LEARNED III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI IN ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION PARTLY AND THEREBY AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.7,89,083/- WITH INTEREST @ 9% PER ANNUM BE KINDLY MODIFIED BY ENHANCING TO RS.15,00,000/- WITH INTEREST @ 12% PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF PETITION, TILL THE DATE OF PAYMENT, BY HOLDING RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 HEREIN JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE TO PAY THE COMPENSATION, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS, HAS PRAYED HEREIN, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15205 MFA No. 100438 of 2020 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Sri Pranav Katageri who represents Sri Sanjay S. Katageri, learned counsel on record for the appellant as well as Sri Iranagouda K. Kabbur, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. This appeal is the outcome of the award that is passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi, in MVC 2322 of 2016 dated 05.10.2019. This is a claimant’s appeal. 3. The appellant who admittedly sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred in the year 2016 filed a petition claiming compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- in total. The tribunal through the impugned award granted a sum of Rs.7,89,083/- as compensation. The contention of the appellant is that he is entitled to a higher sum. 4. Making his submission on the merits of the matter, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15205 MFA No. 100438 of 2020 took treatment for a long period of 20 days as inpatient for the injuries sustained. However, he is left with disability of 100% in respect of his whole body. The appellant by doing tiles fitting work was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. But due to the injuries sustained more particularly to the right hand, he is unable to attend any work and thereby he lost his total earnings. Though sufficient evidence was produced before the tribunal regarding the aspect of disability, the nature of injury sustained, the treatment taken and the plight of the appellant after the accident, the tribunal having taken the disability in respect of whole body as 20% awarded a very meager sum as compensation towards ‘loss of future earnings’. Learned counsel states that due to the disability the appellant is unable to attend any work, therefore future prospects are required to be added while granting the amount which the appellant is entitled towards ‘loss of future earnings’. 5. Contradicting the submission thus made, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that PW.2 who issued disability certificate and gave evidence before the tribunal is a - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15205 MFA No. 100438 of 2020 person who routinely issues disability certificates. Therefore, the tribunal subjecting the evidence of PW.2 and the disability certificate to strict scrutiny took the disability in respect of whole body as 20%, which is proper. Also stating that the appellant failed to produce any proof with regard to his occupation and earnings, learned counsel seeks for dismissal of appeal. 6. In reply to the said submission, learned counsel for the appellant states that the accident occurred in the year 2016 and for the relevant period, for settlement of claims, the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad Bench is taking the notional income as Rs.8,750/- per month, but the tribunal took notional income as Rs.8,000/- per month only and hence at least the figure that is being adopted by the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad Bench for the relevant period may be considered. 7. 7. By all the evidence produced, the appellant succeeded in establishing that he sustained comminuted fracture shaft of right radius distal, subluxation of the right - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15205 MFA No. 100438 of 2020 distal radio-ulnar joint, comminuted fracture of 2nd, 3rd and 4th metacarpal bones right and fracture to proximal phalanx of right little finger. 8. Having discussed at length with regard to the merits of the matter, the tribunal rightly took the disability in respect of whole body as 20% which requires no interference. As per the version of the appellant by doing tiles fitting work he was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. The appellant succeeded in establishing that he sustained two grievous injuries to the right upper limb which resulted in permanent physical disability to the said limb. Considering the occupation of the appellant and the injuries sustained to the right hand, this Court is of the view that future prospects as sought for are required to be added. 9. By the evidence produced, it is clear that the appellant was aged around 29 years as on the date of accident. Therefore as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Pranay - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15205 MFA No. 100438 of 2020 Sethi1, 40% of the earnings are required to be added towards future prospects. Also as sought for by learned counsel for the appellant, the notional income of the appellant is required to be taken as Rs.8,750/- per month. Thus, on taking the notional income of the appellant as Rs.8,750/- per month, adding 40% towards future prospects, applying the appropriate multiplier ‘17’ and disability in respect of whole body as 20%, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive towards ‘loss of future earnings’ is Rs.4,99,800/- (Rs.8,750/- X 12 + 40% X 17 X 20%). The tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,26,400/- only under the said head. Thus the enhancement will be Rs.1,73,400/- (Rs.4,99,800/- minus Rs.3,26,400/-) 10. Though learned counsel for the appellant argued that the compensation granted under all other heads is also on lower side, this Court is of the view that the compensation granted by the Tribunal under all heads except under the head 1 (2017) 16 SCC 680 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15205 MFA No. 100438 of 2020 ‘loss of future earnings’ is just and reasonable. 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 Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi, through orders in MVC 2322 of 2016 dated 05.10.2019 is enhanced by Rs.1,73,400/-. (iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. (iv) 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. (v) On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE EM CT-MCK:List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36