- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15898 MFA No. 101061 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101061 OF 2014 (MV) BETWEEN: ISHWAR RAMAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: MILK DIARY BUSINESS, R/O: KRISHNA KITTUR, TAL: ATHANI, DIST: BELGAUM. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ABHILASH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SHREEVATSA HEGDE, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHIVAGOUDA RAMAGOUDA PATIL, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: KRISHNA KITTUR, TAL: ATHANI, DIST: BELGAUM. (OWNER OF VEHICLE BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KA-23/A-52) 2. THE MANAGER, ICICI LOMBARD, GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, HAVING ITS OFFICE NEAR RPD CROSS, TILAKWADI, KHANAPUR ROAD, BELGAUM, (INSURER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA-23/A-52) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MADHUKESHWAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 21.08.2013 IN MVC.NO.1208/2008 PASSED BY THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MACT-IV, BELGAUM IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15898 MFA No. 101061 of 2014 THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS ON DISMISSAL 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) Heard Sri.Abhilash, who appears through video conference and represents Sri.Sreevatsa Suresh Hegde, learned counsel on record for the appellant. Also heard Sri.Madhukeshwar Deshpande, learned counsel for respondent No.2, who also appears through video conference. Though notice was served upon respondent No.1, respondent No.1 did not choose to contest the matter. 2. Challenge in this appeal is the award that is passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-IV, Belgaum (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for brevity) in M.V.C. No.1208/2008 dated 21.08.2013. This is the claimant's appeal. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15898 MFA No. 101061 of 2014 3. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant is aggrieved by the finding of the Tribunal that he is not entitled for any compensation towards loss of future earnings. Learned counsel states that as per the evidence of PW-2, the appellant suffers with 40% permanent disability. But the evidence of PW-2 as well as the Disability Certificate which was produced and was got marked as Ex.P.13 were not looked into. Learned counsel further submits that as a Milk Vendor, the appellant was earning huge sum as on the date of accident. Learned counsel also states that the notional income of the appellant may be considered. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 states that the liability is fixed upon respondent No.1 only and the appellant has raised a plea in that regard also in the grounds of appeal. 5. In reply to the said submission, learned counsel for the appellant states that the appellant is restricting his - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15898 MFA No. 101061 of 2014 submission so far as quantum of compensation is concerned and he has no grievance regarding the liability that is fixed upon respondent No.1 only. 6. By the evidence of PW-2 and by the contents of Ex.P.13-Disability Certificate, it is clear that the appellant sustained fracture of 1/3rd of shaft of right femur. As per the evidence of PW-2, the disability in respect of the right lower limb is 40%. Considering the nature of injury sustained and the totality of evidence produced, this Court is of the view that the disability in respect of whole body can be taken as 10%. Medical records reveal that the appellant was aged around 32 years as on the date of accident. . Therefore, the multiplier to be applied is ‘16’ as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another1 case. 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15898 MFA No. 101061 of 2014 7. As no proof is produced with regard to the occupation and the earnings of the appellant as on the date of accident, as the accident occurred in the year 2008 and for the relevant period, as the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad is taking the notional income as Rs.4,250/- per month, this Court is of the view that the said figure requires consideration. Therefore, on taking the notional income as Rs.4,250/- per month, on applying the appropriate multiplier ‘16’ and the disability in respect of whole body as 10%, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to under the head ‘loss of future earnings’ is Rs.81,600/- (Rs.4,250 x 12 x 16 x 10%). 8. Thus, this Court ultimately holds that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.81,600/- in addition to the sum that is awarded as compensation by the Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:15898 MFA No. 101061 of 2014 (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-IV, Belgaum through orders in M.V.C. No.1208/2008 dated 21.08.2013 is enhanced by Rs.81,600/-. (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.1 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of three months. (v) On deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE RH CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14