- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44780 MFA No. 4395 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4395 OF 2021 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. K.B. SHASHIDHAR AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, S/O BASAPPA @ LAKKANAPPA, R/A KADALAPURA, HOLAVANAHALLI HOBLI, KORATAGERE TALUK, C/O JNANESHWARA, S/O SIDDARAMANNA, ARAKERE, KASABA HOBLI, TUMKUR TALUK. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MUSHTAQ AHMED, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. B V GOPALAKRISHNA AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS, R/A NO.9, RADHA NILYA, 1ST MAIN, 1ST BLOCK, 3RD PHASE, BSK 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE - 560 031. 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DV.NO. 10 PLOT NO.101,106, NO.1, NI, BMC HOUSE, CONNAUGHT PALACE, NEW DELHI - 110 001, REP. BY ITS MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY MS. KHUSHI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.RAVISH BENNI, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2, Digitally signed by KORLAHALLI BHARATHIDEVIKRISHNACHARYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44780 MFA No. 4395 of 2021 VIDE ORDER DATED 17.10.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 20.11.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.733/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT-X, TUMAKURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 20.11.2017, passed by the Prl.Senior Civil Judge and MACT-X, Tumakuru, (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.733/2013, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. This matter is slated for admission, with consent of learned advocates appearing for both the sides, it is taken up for final disposal. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44780 MFA No. 4395 of 2021 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 4. The brief facts of the case are that, on 16.11.2012, at about 9.30 a.m., claimant met with an accident at Gundinapalya Cross, near Hulikunte, due to rash and negligent driving of a car bearing registration No.KA-41-N-6324. As a result of the impact, claimant sustained fracture and dislocation of right femur and abrasion over left leg, right thigh and over left eyebrow. He has spent substantial amount towards medical expenses. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he has suffered from permanent disability. With these reasons, the claimant has prayed for awarding of compensation. 5. The respondent No.1 was the owner and respondent No.2 was the insurer of the offending motorcycle. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in their respective written statement denied the contentions of the claim petitioner and respondent No.2-insurer denied its liability - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44780 MFA No. 4395 of 2021 to pay the compensation. With these reasons, both prayed to dismiss the claim petition. 6. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues. 7. The claimant to prove his case, examined two witnesses as PW-1 and PW-2 and marked 17 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-17. On behalf of the respondents, no oral or documentary evidence was produced. 8. The Tribunal after hearing both parties and appreciating the evidence on record, by the impugned judgment, awarded the following amount of compensation: Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and suffering 25,000/- Medical expenses 59,600/- Loss of income during hospitalization, attendant charges, food and nutrition and conveyance 12,000/- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44780 MFA No. 4395 of 2021 Loss of income during laid up period 28,000/- Loss of future income 2,28,480/- Loss of amenities 20,000/- Future medical expenses 40,000/- Total 4,13,080/- 9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the claimant as well as the insurer. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant contended that claimant is an expert mason, specialised in tile fixing and he was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has not considered the same. Learned counsel further contended that the age of the claimant was 28 years, but the Tribunal has erroneously taken the multiplier as `16' instead of `17'; The amount of compensation awarded under all the heads, except medical expenses, are on the lower side. Therefore, prayed to enhance the same. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44780 MFA No. 4395 of 2021 11. Learned counsel for respondent No.2-insurer submitted that the Tribunal has properly considered the case of the claimant and has awarded a just and reasonable compensation, which does not call for any interference by this Court and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 12. The fact of the accident is not in dispute. The Tribunal after appreciating the evidence on record, held that the accident occurred due to the negligence of driver of the car, which is not in dispute by either side. Hence, there is no need to reconsider the same. 13. The claimant has not produced any materials to substantiate that, as an expert mason, he was earning Rs.15,000/- per month. Except oral evidence, there are no materials. Therefore, the Tribunal followed the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and assessed the income of the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44780 MFA No. 4395 of 2021 claimant as Rs.7,000/- per month. The said finding does not call for any interference. 14. The doctor - PW-2 assessed the disability of the claimant to the right lower limb as 52.5%. The Tribunal has taken 1/3 of the same and has assessed the permanent disability to the whole body as 17%. The Tribunal has taken the age of the claimant as 30 years on the basis of Ex.P-1, but the wound certificate discloses the age of the claimant as 28 years. Therefore, the age mentioned in the medical record is considered to assess the age of the claimant. If it is taken as 28 years, then the appropriate multiplier applicable is `17'. On these factors, compensation under the head `loss of future earning capacity' is assessed. 15. The compensation awarded under the heads, `pain and suffering', `attendant charges, special diet etc.,' and `loss of amenities' are on the lower side, which requires enhancement. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44780 MFA No. 4395 of 2021 16. For the aforesaid discussions, the claimant is entitled to following amount of compensation : Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and suffering 50,000/- Medical expenses 59,600/- Attendant expenses, special diet and conveyance charges 25,000/- Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.7,000/- x 4 months) 28,000 Loss of income due to permanent disability (Rs.7,000/- x 12 x 17 x 17%) 2,42,760/- Loss of amenities 50,000/- Future medical expenses 40,000/- Total 4,95,360/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal Enhancement- Rounded off - 4,13,080/- 82,280/- 83,000/- The claimant is also entitled to interest on the enhanced amount at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44780 MFA No. 4395 of 2021 petition till its realisation. While condoning the delay of 755 days in filing the appeal, this Court ordered that, in case if the appeal is allowed, the claimant is not entitled for interest on the enhanced amount of compensation for the delayed period. Therefore, claimant is not entitled to interest on the enhanced amount for a period of 755 days. 17. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the said amount of compensation. 18. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated 20th November 2017, passed by the Prl.Senior Civil Judge and MACT-X, Tumakuru, in MVC No.733/2013, stands modified. iii) The claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.83,000/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., excluding the interest for the delayed period of 755 days in filing the - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:44780 MFA No. 4395 of 2021 appeal and for the amount awarded towards future medical expenses. iv) The respondent No.2 - Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award. v) The amount enhanced is marginal, therefore, entire enhanced amount is ordered to be released in favour of the claimant on due identification. vi) Draw award accordingly. Registry is directed to send back the records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE bk/ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30