- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13726 MFA No. 101850 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101850 OF 2018 (MV-I) BETWEEN: KUMAR DAREPPA S/O. SHANKAR CHOUGULE, AGE: 8 YEARS, OCC: SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED BY M/G FATHER SHANKAR S/O. IRAPPA CHOUGULE, AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. HINDALGA-591108, TALUKA & DISTRICT-BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY MISS. VINUTHA M. KHANNUR FOR SRI. MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATES) AND: 1. JAGADISH S. MANE, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: SERVICE, R/O. HOUSE NEAR BK 89, COMPOUND NO.1, ULLAS NAGAR, DIST: THANE-400601, STATE: MAHARASHTRA. GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13726 MFA No. 101850 of 2018 2. THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CTS NO.10719, SRY NO.1357/A, NEHARU NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SURESH S. GUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1-NOTICE DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.02.2018 PASSED IN M.V.C. NO.1155/2016 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE IX-ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI AND AWARD THE COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED IN THE CLAIM PETITION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY; PASS ANY OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS JUST AND PROPER UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE INCLUDING AWARD OF COST, 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:13726 MFA No. 101850 of 2018 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) 1. Heard Ms.Vinutha Khannur, who represents Sri. Madanmohan M. Khannur, learned counsel on record for the appellant as well as Sri. Suresh S. Gundi, learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. A boy aged around 6 years met with road traffic accident that occurred in the year 2015. Claiming compensation, he filed a petition. The Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi, which entertained the case as MVC No.1115/2016, passed orders on 01.02.2018 holding that the claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,26,162/- as compensation. Being aggrieved by the award thus passed, the claimant filed the present appeal seeking enhancement. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13726 MFA No. 101850 of 2018 3. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant sustained fracture of right femur and fracture of the left tibia and fibula. Learned counsel submits that the appellant took treatment as an inpatient for more than 20 days. Learned counsel also states that the appellant produced the evidence of PW2, who clearly stated that the disability in respect of the right lower limb is 22% and in respect of the left lower limb it is 18%. Learned counsel submits that the Tribunal granted a sum of Rs.1,26,162/- which includes the medical expenditure incurred. Learned counsel contends that the sum thus granted as compensation is on the lower side and therefore, the present appeal is filed. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2, on the other hand, states that the compensation that is granted by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. However, in light of the submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellant, there may be marginal enhancement. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13726 MFA No. 101850 of 2018 5. By all the evidence produced, the appellant succeeded in establishing that he took treatment as an inpatient from 15.12.2015 to 07.01.2016. Also, as per the evidence of PW2, the permanent physical disability in respect of the right lower limb is 22% and in respect of the left lower limb is 18%. Thus, the whole-body disability can be considered to be a bit more than 10%. 6. In the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case between Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd.,1 it was clearly held that on assessment of disability, compensation is required to be granted in a lump sum so far as minor children are concerned. The Hon’ble Court at para 12 of the judgment held as follows: “12. Though it is difficult to have an accurate assessment of the compensation in the case of children suffering disability on account of a motor vehicle accident, having regard to the relevant factors, precedents and the approach of various High Courts, we are of the view that the 1 (2014) 14 SCC 396 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13726 MFA No. 101850 of 2018 appropriate compensation on all other heads in addition to the actual expenditure for treatment, attendant, etc., should be, if the disability is above 10% and upto 30% to the whole body, Rs.3 lakhs; upto 60%, Rs.4 lakhs; upto 90%, Rs.5 lakhs and above 90%, it should be Rs.6 lakhs. For permanent disability upto 10%, it should be Re.1 lakh, unless there are exceptional circumstances to take different yardstick”. 7. Therefore, considering the evidence produced and the decision that is referred to supra, this Court is of the view that it will be wholly just and reasonable in case the appellant is awarded compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- in toto. Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the following order: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The compensation granted by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Belagavi, through orders in MVC No.1115/2016 dated 01.02.2018 is enhanced from Rs.1,26,162/- to Rs.2,00,000/-. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13726 MFA No. 101850 of 2018 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 the certified copy of the judgment. v. The Tribunal is directed to invest the deposited amount in any interest-yielding fixed deposit scheme of any nationalized bank until the appellant attains the age of majority. vi. On attaining the age of majority, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE gab CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50