- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25107 MFA No. 7412 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7412 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: MR. D. LOKANATH REDDY, S/O ANJANYA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, NO.18, 1ST MAIN, MOHAN KUMAR NAGAR, YESHWANTHAPURA, BANGALORE - 560 022. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. BHANU H.M, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. M.R. KUMARASWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. R. SUNDARA MURTHY, S/O RAMAKRISHNAN, R/AT NO.758, S.P. CHETTY STREET, AMBURPET, VANIYAMBADI, VELLORE, TAMIL NADU - 635 751. 2. ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NO.152, RICHMOND ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 035. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SUNILKUMAR K, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. H.S. LINGARAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 24.04.2018, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25107 MFA No. 7412 of 2015 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.03.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.7454/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE 9TH ADDITIONAL, SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MEMBER, 34TH ACMM, ADDITIONAL MACT, BENGALURU, 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 7th March 2015, passed by the IX Additional Small Causes and Additional M.A.C.T., Bengaluru, (for short 'the Tribunal'), in MVC No.7454/2009, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that, on 12.07.2009, at around 11.05 a.m., the claimant met with - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25107 MFA No. 7412 of 2015 an accident, while he was riding the Motor Cycle bearing Reg.No.KA-04-EK-7095 on T. Dasarahalli Road, Bangalore; at Raghavendra 'U' Turn a Lorry bearing Reg.No.TN-23- AT-6946, being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed the Motor Cycle. Due to the impact, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries such as crush degloving wound on left leg with dorsum of foot intact and exposing tibia with fibula. He underwent inpatient treatment for nearly 40 days and thereafter continued with regular follow up treatment, as the degloving injuries had not healed. The Claimant was aged around 50 years at the time of accident. He was working as Building Contractor and earning Rs.500/- per day. Due to injuries sustained in the accident, he has suffered permanent disability. With these reasons, the claimant has prayed for awarding of compensation. 4. Respondent No.1 is the owner of the Lorry/offending vehicle. Respondent No.2 is the Insurer. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25107 MFA No. 7412 of 2015 5. Respondent No.1 remained absent before the Tribunal and respondent No.2-Insurer appeared before the Tribunal and filed its written statement. It has denied the contentions of the claim petitioner. It also denied its liability to pay the compensation. With these reasons, prayed to dismiss the claim petition. 6. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues, for its determination. 7. The claimant to prove his case examined three witnesses as PWs-1 to 3 and marked 16 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-16. Respondent No.2 has not led oral or documentary evidence. 8. The Tribunal after hearing both parties and appreciating the materials available on record, awarded following amount of compensation with interest @ 6% p.a:- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25107 MFA No. 7412 of 2015 Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and suffering 50,000/- Actual Medical expenses 3,69,972/- Future Medical expenses 20,000/- Conveyance 5,000/- Attendant Charges 5,000/- Food Nourishment & Diet Charges 10,000/- Loss of income during laid up period 36,000/- Loss of future income arising out of 10% disability 79,200/- Loss of amenities in life 20,000/- Total 5,95,172/- Being aggrieved by the said award passed by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 9. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent No.2. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that according to evidence of PW.3, claimant has been suffering - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25107 MFA No. 7412 of 2015 from permanent disability to an extent of 15% to the whole body, however, the Tribunal has taken it as 10%. The amount of compensation awarded under other heads also is on the lower side. Claimant was admitted as inpatient for 40 days. He underwent several procedures and Lab Tests. One of the Family members had to attend to the claimant around the clock. The loss of amenities due to degloving injuries is to the left leg. The said aspect was not considered by the Tribunal, therefore prayed for enhancement of compensation. 11. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 contended that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and it does not call for any interference by this Court. The claimant sustained fracture of Fibula and other degloving injuries, since it is minor fracture of Fibula, it does not lead to disability to an extent of 15% to the whole body. With these reasons, he prayed to dismiss the appeal. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25107 MFA No. 7412 of 2015 12. On re-appreciating the evidence available on record, it appears the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under some of the heads are inadequate. The Tribunal has taken the age of the claimant as 51 years. The Tribunal has discussed this point in paragraph No.22. Considering the materials available on record, Tribunal ought to have accepted that the age of the claimant was 50 years. The multiplier of next slab commences only from the age of 51 years. Hence the multiplier taken as '11' is incorrect, and should have been taken as '13'. The income assessed by the Tribunal was proper and does not call for interference. The Tribunal has discussed the disability in paragraph No.27 of the judgment and rightly held that the claimant had suffered disability to an extent of 10% to the whole body. This finding also does not call for any interference. On re- appreciating the evidence, the claimant is entitled for the following amount of compensation:- - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25107 MFA No. 7412 of 2015 Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and sufferings 75,000/- Actual Medical expenses 3,69,972/- Special diet, conveyance and attendant charges 30,000/- Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.6,000/- x 6) 36,000/- Loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability (Rs.6,000/- x 12 x 13 x 10%) 93,600/- Loss of amenities 50,000/- Future medical expenses 20,000/- Total 6,74,572/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal Enhancement- Rounded off- 5,95,172/- 79,400/- 80,000/- 13. Undisputedly respondents are liable to pay compensation and the claimant is also entitled to interest on the enhanced amount of compensation at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realization - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25107 MFA No. 7412 of 2015 excluding the amount of Rs.20,000/- being awarded towards future medical expenses. 14. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated 7th March 2015, passed in MVC.No.7454/2009 by the IX Additional Small Causes and Additional MACT., Bengaluru, stands modified. iii) The claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.80,000/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount, from the date of petition till its realization. iv) Claimant is also not entitled to interest for the delayed period of 87 days in filing the appeal, as well as on Rs.20,000/- awarded towards future medical expenses. v) The respondent No.2 - Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:25107 MFA No. 7412 of 2015 vi) The remaining portion of the award of the Tribunal shall remain unaltered. vii) As the enhanced amount is marginal, entire enhanced amount with interest shall be released in favour of the claimant, on due verification. viii) No order as to costs. ix 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 NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8 CT: BHK