- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3196 OF 2017 (MV-I) BETWEEN: ALTHAF @ MOHAMMED ALTHAF @ ABDUL KHADAR ALTHAF, S/O MOHAMMED SHARIEF, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O ZAKIRA COTTAGE, HANDELU HOUSE, NEAR MOSQUE, PUTHIGE VILLAGE, MIJAR POST, MOODABIDRI, MANGALORE TALUK, D.K. PIN-574225. …APPELLANT (BY SRI JEEVAN K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. JERALD PEREIRA @ JERALD ASHOK PEREIRA, S/O SEBASTIAN PEREIRA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/O PEREIRA HOUSE, SHIRTHADY MAIN ROAD, SHIRTHADY VILLAGE, SHIRTADY POST, MOODABIDRI, MANGALORE TALUK D.K., PIN-574227. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE: ESSEL CHAMBERS, Digitally signed by NIRMALA DEVI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 KARANGALPADY, MANGALURU, D.K., PIN: 575003. 3. RIZWAN U. SHEIK S/O M. USMAN SHEIK, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O DOOR NO.3-74, USMAN MANZIL, PUTHIGE VILLAGE, MITHABAIL POST, MOODABIDRI, MANGALUR TALUK, D.K., PIN-574227. 4. THE BRANCH MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.65, ESHWARI COMPLEX, DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560021. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI P.B. RAJU, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 & R-4; R-1 & R-3 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27.08.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.518/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER MACT-III AND II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, D.K. MANGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FURTHER SUBMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 27.08.2016 passed in MVC No.518/2012 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge and III Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada1, wherein the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a total compensation of `28,35,000/- together with interest at 6% pa. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of quantum of compensation. 2. The findings of the Tribunal on negligence and liability are not under challenge and have attained finality. Hence, the only aspect that is required to be considered in the present appeal is with regard to the adequacy of the quantum of compensation awarded. 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’ - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 3. Heard the submissions of learned counsel Sri Jeevan K. for the appellant/claimant and learned counsel Sri P.S. Jagadish for learned counsel Sri P.B. Raju for respondent Nos.2 and 4-insurers. 4. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that the age of the claimant is 22 years as on the date of the accident, i.e., 06.12.2011 and applied the applicable multiplier ‘18’, which is just and proper. 5. The claimant was stated to be a driver working at Saudi Arabia and earning a monthly income of `27,000/- per month. The Tribunal, considering the said contention as also noticing the salary certificate (Ex.P.10), has assessed the monthly income of the claimant at `20,000/- per month, which is just and proper. 6. It is evident from the wound certificate (Ex.P.3) and the disability certificate (Ex.P.9) as well as other medical evidence on record that the claimant has sustained grievous injuries to head, grievous injuries to - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 right foot, grievous injuries to right upper limb resulting in amputation of right upper limb, fracture of frontal bone, comminuted fracture of shaft of tibia, fracture of right orbit, fracture of maxillary sinus as well as other contusion injuries. The claimant has taken treatment as an inpatient on various dates for a total period of 85 days. 7. An Ophthalmologist (PW.3) has deposed regarding the injuries to the head and has deposed that the claimant has lost the vision to the left eye due to the fracture of frontal bone. PW.3 has assessed physical disability of 30% with respect to his vision and has deposed that the same is permanent in nature. 8. PW.4 is a Plastic and Cosmetic Surgeon who has deposed regarding the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and the treatment that has been given to the claimant. He has deposed that the claimant was unable to do daily living activities using his right upper limb as there is no muscle strength in the right upper limb - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 and the movements of the right shoulder and wrist are totally restricted. He has deposed that the physical disability of the claimant is 94% to the right upper limb, 6% to the right lower limb and 30% in respect of the vision. 9. PW.5, who is also a doctor, has deposed with regard to the treatment taken by the claimant at the hospital and deposed that the right hand of the claimant has been amputated. That the implants of the right shoulder and right tibia have to be removed and that the same are required to be removed due to the infection. The Tribunal appreciating the material on record has assessed the whole body disability at 50%. 10. The vehement contention of the learned counsel for the claimant is that the disability has been assessed on the lower side. However, learned counsel for the insurer justifies the assessment made by the Tribunal towards disability. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 11. It is pertinent to note here having regard to the Schedule-I to the Employee’s Compensation Act, 19232, keeping in mind the percentage of the loss of earning capacity for similar injuries as also taking into consideration the functional disability of the claimant vis- a-vis his occupation as a driver, as also taking into consideration the medical evidence, it is just and proper that the disability of the claimant is reassessed as 90%. 12. To the income assessed, having regard to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sidram v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.3, future prospects at 40% is required to be awarded. 13. In view of the aforementioned, the compensation is re-assessed as follows: 2 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’ 3 (2023) 3 SCC 439 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 i. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering at `1,00,000/- is just and proper; ii. The Tribunal has noticed that the medical bills as per Ex.P.15 amounts to `4,74,005/- and other four medical bills as per Ex.P.22 amounts to `24,453.50/-. Hence, it is just and proper to award the compensation of `5,00,000/- towards medical expenses; iii. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the period of treatment taken, it is just and proper to award the compensation towards food, nutrition, conveyance and attendant charges in a sum of `1,00,000/-; iv. Having regard to the fact that the claimant was an inpatient for a period of 85 days, the period of treatment is assessed as six months and accordingly, the loss of income during the laid-up period is re-assessed as (`20,000 x 6) `1,20,000/-; - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 v. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of amenities. Having regard to the nature of the injures sustained and resultant disability, it is just and proper to award a sum of `1,00,000/- towards loss of amenities; vi. The Tribunal has awarded future medical expenses at `25,000/-. However, having regard to the fact that the claimant will be required to continuously incur medical expenses throughout his life, it is just and proper to award future medical expenses in a sum of `50,000/-; vii. Compensation towards disability/loss of future earning is re-assessed as (`20,000/- + 40% x 12 x 18 x 90%) `54,43,200/- as against `21,60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal; viii. The claimant will not be entitled for interest on the enhancement of `25,000/- towards future medical expenses. 14. In view of the aforementioned, the compensation is re-assessed as follows: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 Sl.No Compensation Head Amount Awarded by the Tribunal (`) Amount awarded by this Court (`) 1 Pain sufferings 1,00,000.00 1,00,000.00 2 Medical expenses and other incidental expenses 5,50,000.00 5,00,000.00 3 Loss of income on account of physical disability 21,60,000.00 54,43,200.00 4 Food, Nutrition, conveyance and attendant charges - 1,00,000.00 5 Loss of income during laid-up period - 1,20,000.00 6 Loss of amenities - 1,00,000.00 7 Future medical expenses 25,000.00 50,000.00 Total 28,35,000 64,13,200.00 15. Accordingly, the claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of (`64,13,200/- – `28,35,000/-) = `35,78,200/-. 16. In view of the aforementioned, the following: ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part; - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 ii) The judgment and award dated 27.08.2016 passed in MVC No.518/2012 by the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge and III Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mangaluru (Dakshina Kannada) is hereby modified to the extent of holding that the appellant/claimant is entitled to a further compensation of `35,78,200/- in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal together with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. However, the claimant will not be entitled for interest on `25,000/- being enhanced future medical expenses. In all other respects, the judgment and award of the Tribunal remains unaltered; iii) Respondent No.2 – insurer shall deposit the said compensation together with accrued interest within a period of six weeks; iv) Out of the enhanced compensation, 50% shall be digitally released in favour of the claimant and the balance 50% shall be kept in a fixed deposit in any nationalized bank of the choice of the claimant for a period of - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:24909 MFA No. 3196 of 2017 three years upon the expiry of which, the fixed deposit amount together with accrued interest shall be directly released to the claimant without further orders in that regard from the Tribunal or by this Court. v) The Registry to draw the modified award accordingly; vi) Records be transmitted to the Tribunal forthwith. No costs. Sd/- (C.M. POONACHA) JUDGE MBM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 23