- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14707 MFA No. 102149 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102149 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: BASAVARADDI S/O. TIRAKARADDI MANGANNAVAR, AGE: 54 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE WORK, R/O: HANCHINAL, TQ: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MANJUNATH S/O. VIRUPAXAPPA SALONI, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: SALONI, SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI. (OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING REG. NO.KA-24/Q-4649) 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., KURAHATTI BUILDING, NAVALAGUND ROAD, HUBBALLI TALUK, DHARWAD. THROUGH BR. MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SAUNDATTI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14707 MFA No. 102149 of 2015 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD IN M.V.C. NO.324/2014 DATED 25.05.2015 PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL SAUNDATTI UNDER ALL PERMISSIBLE HEADS. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) 1. Heard Ms.Shaila Bellikatti, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri.Suresh S. Gundi, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. Dissatisfied with the sum that is awarded as compensation, the claimant in MVC No.324/2014, which stood pending before the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Saundatti and was disposed of through order dated 25.05.2015 has preferred the present appeal. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14707 MFA No. 102149 of 2015 3. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident and one such injury resulted in amputation of left 4th toe. Due to the injuries sustained, the appellant became totally and permanently disabled. But without considering the same, the Tribunal awarded very meagre sum as compensation. Learned counsel also states that the appellant was an agriculturist by the date of accident and he was earning huge sum through agriculture. But the Tribunal took the notional income as Rs.6,000/- only per month. Learned counsel states that the accident occurred in the year 2013 and for the relevant period, High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad, is taking the notional income as Rs.7,000/- per month for settlement of claims and at least the said figure should have been considered by the Tribunal. Learned counsel thereby seeks for enhancement in compensation under all heads. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14707 MFA No. 102149 of 2015 4. The submission that is made by learned counsel for respondent No.2 is that, the Tribunal awarded just sum as compensation, however, in light of the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant, there may be marginal enhancement insofar as ’loss of future earnings’ is concerned. 5. Having found justification in the submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellant, this Court considers desirable to take the notional income of the appellant as Rs.7,000/- per month. 6. The assessment of disability by the Tribunal is on proper lines. Therefore, without disturbing the other parameters, i.e., disability at 8% in respect of whole body and application of appropriate multiplier 11, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to under the head ‘loss of future earnings’ is Rs.73,920/- (7,000 × 12 × 11 × 8%). However, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.63,360/- only under the said - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14707 MFA No. 102149 of 2015 head. Thus, the enhancement will be Rs.10,560/- (73,920 − 63,360). 7. The appellant succeeded in establishing that he sustained four grievous injuries, i.e., injury to left 4th toe which resulted in its amputation, fracture of 2nd metatarsal and 5th metatarsal bones and fracture of the left little finger. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- under the head ‘pain and suffering’. However, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/- only. Therefore, enhancement under the head ‘pain and suffering’ will be Rs.10,000/- 8. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained, this Court is of the view that the appellant could not have attended to his normal pursuits at least for a period of four months. Thus, ‘loss of earnings during laid-up period’ comes to Rs.28,000/- (7,000 × 4). But the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.18,000/- only under - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14707 MFA No. 102149 of 2015 the said head. Therefore, enhancement will be Rs.10,000/- (Rs.28,000 − Rs.18,000). 9. As rightly contended by learned counsel for the appellant, the Tribunal failed to award any amount towards ‘conveyance charges’ and towards ‘loss of amenities in life’. Considering the nature of injuries sustained and the treatment taken, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to Rs.5,000/- towards ‘conveyance charges’ and Rs.15,000/- towards ‘loss of amenities in life’. 10. Therefore, the total amount which the appellant is entitled to receive in addition to the sum that is awarded by the Tribunal is Rs.50,560/- (10,560 + 10,000 + 10,000 + 5,000 + 15,000). Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the following order: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14707 MFA No. 102149 of 2015 ii. Compensation that is granted by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Saundatti through orders in MVC No.324/2014 dated 25.05.2015 is enhanced by Rs.50,560/-. 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 eight 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 gab CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 75