- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10029-DB MFA No. 103056 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL M.F.A. NO. 103056 OF 2022 (MV-I) BETWEEN: VITHAL BABURAO KATHARE, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: TAILORING WORK, R/O. SECTOR NO.34, PLOT NO.87, NAVANAGAR, BAGALKOTE, TQ. DIST. BAGALKOTE, PIN-581701. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ANAND R. KOLLI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHIVAKUMAR RANGAPPA DANKANNAVAR, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE WORK AND OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING REG NO.KA-29/EG-9547, R/O. BEDARBUDIHAL POST, CHIKAMUCHALGUDA, TQ. BADAMI, DIST. BAGALKOT, PIN-587201. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, THE TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 15TH FLOOR, TOWER-A, PENISULA BUSINESS PARK, GANAPATHRAO KADAM KARMG, OFF SENAPATI BAPAT MARG, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI, PIN-400013. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MADHUKESHWAR DESHPANDE, ADV. FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO MODIFYING THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY THE HON’BLE MEMBER M.A.C.T-IV BAGALKOTE AT: BAGALKOTE DATED 07.03.2022 IN MVC NO.169/2020 AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10029-DB MFA No. 103056 of 2022 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and award dated 07.03.2022 passed in MVC No.169/2020 by the learned II Addl. Senior Civil Judge and Member, MACT, Bagalkot (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’, for short). 2. Brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 31.12.2019 at about 8:00 a.m., the petitioner was on morning walk, at that time a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA- 29/EG-9547 ridden by its rider in rash and negligent manner, dashed to the petitioner resulted in petitioner sustained grievous injuries, he was hospitalized and provided treatment. The petitioner filed a claim petition seeking compensation. 3. The respondents No.1 and 2 entered appearance opposed the claim petition denying the accident, income, avocation and disability suffered by him in the road accident. The claimant examined himself as PW1 and got examined - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10029-DB MFA No. 103056 of 2022 doctor as PW2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P24. The respondent did not adduce evidence. The Tribunal assessed the income of the deceased at ₹10,000/-, assessed the disability at 15% and awarded total compensation of ₹3,48,661/-. Being aggrieved, this appeal is filed seeking for higher compensation. 4. Learned counsel Sri. Anand R.Kolli appearing for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has committed a grave error in assessing the income of the deceased at ₹10,000/- per month which is required to be reassessed appropriately. It is submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding any compensation under the head of loss of income during the laid up period, which he is entitled for a period of 3 months as he has undergone surgery and hospitalized for period of 8 days. It is submitted that the award of compensation under the head of loss of amenities is very meager, which is required to be enhanced appropriately. 5. Per contra, Sri Madhukeshwar Deshpande, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the claimant has failed to produce any evidence with regard to the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10029-DB MFA No. 103056 of 2022 income. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of the claimant at ₹10,000/- per month which does not call for any enhancement. It is submitted that the claimant was inpatient for a period of 8 days. Hence, question of paying any compensation under the head of loss of income during the laid up period would not arise and award of compensation in all heads is just and proper does not call for any enhancement. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 6. We have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent No.2/Insurance Company and meticulously perused the materials available on record, including the Tribunal record. 7. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions advanced. The only point that would arise for our consideration in this appeal is; “Whether the appellant is entitled for higher compensation?” 8. The above point is answered in affirmative for the following reasons. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10029-DB MFA No. 103056 of 2022 9. The parties to proceeding do not dispute that in a road accident dated 31.12.2019, the appellant – claimant sustained grievous injuries and was taken to Soragavi Hospital and thereafter shifted to Ashirwad Hospital, Bagalkot where he was provided treatment as an inpatient and undergone surgery. The records indicate that the appellant has sustained fracture of tibia and fibula as is evident from the medical evidence on record. The Tribunal while determining the compensation, has assessed the income of the injured at ₹10,000/- per month. It is not in dispute that the appellant has not produced any legally acceptable evidence before the Tribunal with regard to his income. Hence, it would be appropriate for his income to take notionally placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by the KSLSA. Hence, we reassess the income of the injured appellant at ₹13,250/- per month. Hence, the loss of future earning due to disability is as under: ₹13,250 x 12 x 11 x 15% = ₹2,62,350/-. 10. The Tribunal has committed an error in not awarding any compensation under the head of loss of income during the laid up period. The appellant was inpatient for a - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10029-DB MFA No. 103056 of 2022 period of 8 days and thereafter he was required to take rest at least for a period of 3 months. Taking note of the same, we are of the view that the appellant is entitled for the compensation under the head of loss of income during the laid up period which would be ₹13,250/- x 3 = ₹39,750/-. 11. The Tribunal has awarded ₹10,000/- under the head of loss of amenities. In our considered view the said compensation is very meager. Taking note of the nature of injuries suffered, treatment provided, we are of the considered view that interest of justice would be met, if we award ₹45,000/- under the head of loss of amenities of life as against ₹10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12. Insofar as award of compensation by the Tribunal on all other heads is unaltered. Hence, the compensation is re-determined as under: 1 Pain and sufferings ₹ 40,000/- 2 Medical expenses ₹ 76,661/- 3 Transportation, nourishment, conveyance, attendant and charges ₹ 4,000/- 4. Loss of income during the laid up period ₹ 39,750/- 4 Towards loss of future income due to permanent disability ₹ 2,62,350/- 5 Towards future medical expenses ₹ 20,000/- - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10029-DB MFA No. 103056 of 2022 6 Towards loss of amenities of life ₹ 45,000/- TOTAL ₹ 4,87,761/- Thus, the claimant would be entitled for the total compensation of ₹ 4,87,761/- as against ₹3,48,661/- awarded by the Tribunal. 13. Normally, this Court and the Hon’ble Apex Court taking note of prevailing rate of interest paid on the fixed deposit by the nationalized banks, would award interest at 6% per annum. Therefore, in the present case also, the claimant is entitled to an interest on the compensation amount at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. Hence, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The impugned judgment and award dated 07.03.2022 passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and Member of MACT, Bagalkot, in MVC No.169/2020, is hereby modified and the appellant is entitled to total compensation of ₹4,87,761/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:10029-DB MFA No. 103056 of 2022 from the date of petition till date of payment. iii. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company shall deposit the compensation amount within a period of eight [8] weeks before the Tribunal. iv. Registry to transmit the records to the Tribunal forthwith. v. Draw the award accordingly. Sd/- (S.SUNIL DUTT YADAV) JUDGE Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL) JUDGE CLK CT-AN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 62