- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13682 MFA No. 101684 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101684 OF 2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: HEMA W/O. MARUTI KUMBAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCC: TAILORING WORK, RESIDENT OF MUSTAGATTI VILLAGE, KURUGODU HOBLI, BALLARI TALUK AND DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. AMARE GOUDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SURESH VALIKAR S/O. YANKAPPA YANE NUNKAPPA, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: KSRTC BUS DRIVER BARING REG. NO.KA-34/F-1268 & R/O: NO.5414, MADAGANUR VILLAGE, GADAG TALUK AND DISTRICT. 2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, NEKRTC, BALLARI. 3. RAJKUMAR YADAV S/O. MATAPRASAD YADAV, AGED 38 YEARS, GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13682 MFA No. 101684 of 2020 LORRY DRIVER, LORRY BEARING REG. NO.KA-34/7765, R/O. NO.HARIHARAPURA VILLAGE, MAZUA TALUK, MAIRZAPUR DISTRICT, U.P. STATE PRESENTLY RESIDING AT M/S. GLOBAL FREIGHT CARRIERS, TORANAGALLU, SANDUR TALUK, BALLARI DISTRICT. 4. PUNITH BAGARIA, S/O. ASHOK KUMAR BAGARIA, MAJOR, LORRY OWNER BEARING NO.KA-34/7765, M/S. GLOBAL FREIGHT CARRIERS, N.H.63, HOSAPET-BALLARI ROAD, KUDITHINI, BALLARI DISTRICT. 5. THE MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., I FLOOR, SLV TOWER, PARVATHI NAGAR, MAIN ROAD, BALLARI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.C. BHUTI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE FOR R5; R1, R3 & R4-NOTICE DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.02.2020 PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-V, AT BALLARI IN M.V.C. NO.745/2018 AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED IN THE ABOVE APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13682 MFA No. 101684 of 2020 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Sri.Amaregouda learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri.S.C.Bhuti learned counsel for respondent No.2 who appear physically before this Court. Also heard Sri.G.N.Raichur learned counsel for respondent No.5 who appears through video conference. At request of all the learned counsel, the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal. 2. This appeal is the outcome of the award that is passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V, Ballari (hereinafter be referred as ‘the tribunal’ for brevity) in M.V.C. No.745/2018 dated 29.02.2020. This is a claimant's appeal. 3. The claimant who sustained injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred in the year 2016 filed a petition claiming compensation of Rs.11,50,000/- in total. The tribunal through the impugned award granted a sum of Rs.2,58,816/- - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13682 MFA No. 101684 of 2020 as compensation. The version of the appellant is that she is entitled for a higher sum. 4. Arguing the matter learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant as a Tailor was earning huge sum by the date of accident. The tribunal without considering the occupation and earnings of the appellant took the notional income as Rs.7,500/- per month. Learned counsel states that the accident occurred in the year 2016 and for the relevant period even the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as Rs.8,750/- per month for settlement of claims and at least said figure should have been adopted. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant produced the evidence of PW-2 to establish the nature of injuries sustained and the aspect of disability. PW-2 clearly stated that the disability in respect of whole body is 32%. However, the tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 10% and awarded very meager sum as compensation under the head loss of future earnings. Learned counsel further states that the compensation granted under all - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13682 MFA No. 101684 of 2020 other heads is also on lower side. Learned counsel thereby seeks for enhancement in compensation. 5. Per contra learned counsel who represents respondent No.2 and learned counsel who represents respondent No.5 makes a submission that the compensation that is granted by the tribunal is justifiable and therefore the award of the tribunal needs no interference. 6. By all the evidence produced the appellant succeeded in establishing that she sustained communited fracture of middle 1/3rd of right tibia, fracture of middle 3rd of right fibula, fracture of 2nd metatarsal bone of left foot and laceration over liver. She also established that she underwent two surgeries during the course of treatment. However, considering the totality of evidence produced, the tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 10% and the said assessment needs no interference. However, considering the submission that is made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the notional income of the appellant is taken as Rs.8,750/- per month. Without disturbing the other parameters that is application of appropriate multiplier as ‘18’ - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13682 MFA No. 101684 of 2020 and disability in respect of whole body as 10%, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive under the head loss of future earnings is Rs.1,89,000/- (Rs.8,750 X 12 X 18 X 10%). The tribunal did not award any compensation for loss of earning during laid up period. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained, the surgery underwent and the treatment taken, this Court is of the view that the appellant would not have attended her normal pursuits at least for a period of 5 months. Therefore, loss of earning during laid up period comes to Rs.43,750/- (Rs.8,750 X 5). Also this court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.25,000/- towards food, extra nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges and Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities. Thus, the total sum which the appellant is entitled to receive as compensation is as under: Heads Amount in Rs. Pain and suffering 50,000.00 Food, extra nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges 25,000.00 Medical expenses 46,816.00 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13682 MFA No. 101684 of 2020 Future medical expenses 10,000.00 Loss of future earnings 1,89,000.00 Loss of income during laid up period 43,750.00 Loss of amenities 10,000.00 TOTAL 3,74,566.00 7. In light of the aforementioned discussion, it is clear that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,74,566/- as compensation. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the appeal is required to be allowed in part. Thus, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V, Ballari through orders in M.V.C. No.745/2018 dated 29.02.2020 is enhanced from Rs.2,58,816/- to Rs.3,74,566/-. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13682 MFA No. 101684 of 2020 (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) The liability fixed upon the respondents by the tribunal applies to the enhanced sum as well. (v) Respondents No.2 and 5 are directed to deposit their respective shares out of the enhanced sum within a period of 8 weeks from date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. (vi) On such deposit the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE RH CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50