- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 105154 OF 2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SHRI.PRADEEP S/O. MARUTI HALAGEKAR AGE: 25 YEARS, OCC: LABOUR (NOW NIL), R/O: GUNDAPI, HALASHI, TQ: KHANAPUR, DISTRICT: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. UMESH C. AINAPUR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SHRI.GOURISH S/O. MOHAN NARVEKAR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: H.NO.26, NEAR MARKET COMPLEX BUILDING, FOREST OFFICE TAMSODA, DHARBONDORA, TQ: QUEPAN, DIST: SOUTH GAO-403406, STATE GOA. 2. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., RAMDEV GALLI, BELAGAVI-590001 POLICY REQUEST ID NO.R32181121, VALID FROM 15/05/2016 TO 14/05/2018). …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MADHUKESHWAR DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1- NOTICE DISPENSED WITH) MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO, MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 24.04.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.2236/2017 BY ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED BY THE PETITIONER/ APPELLANT, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. Digitally signed by ANJALI M Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, COURT DELIVERED THE JUDGMENT THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.M.SHYAM PRASAD AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 24.04.2019 passed in MVC.No.2236/2017 by the I Additional District Judge, and MACT II, Belagavi awarding total compensation of Rs.2,99,600/- in all. Being dissatisfied with this award, the appellant claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement. 2. Parties to this appeal are referred as per the rank before the Tribunal. 3. The petitioner/claimant filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act alleging, that on 14.07.2017 at about 10.30 a.m, he was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing Registration No.GA-05/H-2028 from - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 Ponda towards Usgaon on Usgaon – Ponda Road, at that time, a Maruti Swift Car bearing Registration No.GA-09/A- 7389 came from his hind side driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed to his motorcycle. Because of this accident, claimant sustained grievous injuries on his person. He was shifted to Government Hospital, Ponda and thereafter, to GMC Bambolin Hospital, for further treatment. Though, he has taken treatment, he has been disabled to do any work, therefore, he prays to award the compensation as prayed in the claim petition. 4. Both the respondents appeared before the Tribunal and opposed the claim petition denying the entire assertion with regard to the accident, his income, sustaining grievous injuries and disability. It is contented by respondent No.1 that, the insurance policy in respect of the said vehicle was valid on the date of accident and hence, it is respondent No.2 to pay the compensation. Whereas, respondent No.2 contends that, driver of said Car was not holding the Driving Licence, thereby; there is violation of policy condition. Hence, it is not liable to pay the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 compensation. It is prayed by both the respondents to dismiss the petition. 5. The learned Tribunal based upon the rival pleadings framed in all 4 issues. To prove the claim of the claimant, PW.1, the claimant entered the witness box and also examined Dr. S.D. Patil as PW.2. Got marked Exs.P1 to P15, closed claimants’ evidence. With consent of both the side, the Insurance Policy is marked at Ex.R1. Respondents have not lead any oral evidence. 6. The Learned Tribunal having heard the arguments and on assessment of the evidence has categorically held that, the said accident has taken place because of rash and negligent driving of the offending Swift Car by its driver and claimant had suffered grievous injuries on his person. So also, he has suffered 13% disability. By applying the principle laid down in various judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court has found that, the claimant entitled for compensation as under: - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 Sl. No. Different Heads under which compensation is awarded Amount In Rs. 1. Pain and suffering 20,000-00 2. Medical expenses 6,933-00 3. Loss due to physical disability 2,24,640-00 4. Loss of income during laid up period 8,000-00 5. Towards food, nutrition and attendant charges, loss of comforts and amenities 20,000-00 6. Future Medical expenses 20,000-00 Grand Total 2,99,573-00 7. The learned Tribunal fastened liability on both the respondents to pay the compensation, however, directed respondent No.2 to deposit the compensation amount. 8. Now being dissatisfied with the said award, the appellant/claimant has preferred this appeal seeking enhancement. 9. The learned counsel for the claimant Sri. Umesh C. Ainapur would submit that, in the said accident, the claimant had suffered grievous injuries like fracture and he has suffered disability as assessed by the Doctor to the extent of 40% in respect of the right lower limb. He would - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 submit that, the claimant was aged 23 years at the time of accident and was earning Rs.1,000/- per day. In view of judgment of Sarla Verma and Others V/s Delhi Transport Corporation and Another1 as well as National Insurance Company Limited V/s Pranay Sethi2 and Raj Kumar V/s Ajay Kumar3, the claimant is entitled for compensation as claimed. He would submit that the claimant had spent substantial money towards medical expenses. Now he is completely unemployed because of the injuries and the disabilities. Therefore, it is prayed to enhance the compensation. 10. Respondent No.1 remained absent. Respondent No.2 standing counsel Sri. Madhukeshwar Deshpande would submit that, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the compensation by assigning reasons which cannot be interfered with in this appeal. He would submit that the claimant has suffered the fracture but no evidence is placed 1 AIR 2009 SC 3104 2 AIR 2017 SC 5157 3 (2011) 1 SCC 343 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 on record to show that he has suffered disability to the extent and in the manner alleged. Therefore, he would submit that the disability so assessed by the Tribunal is also on the higher side, so also his income. Hence, he prays to dismiss the appeal without interfering into the findings of the Tribunal. 11. Having heard the argument of both side and on perusal of the material placed on record, the point that would be considered in this appeal is: “Whether the claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation as prayed?” 12. Our answer would be partly in the affirmative for the reasons stated below: As the respondents have not disputed about the accident, so also rash and negligent driving of the Swift Car by its driver, in this appeal we need not delve into that aspect. According to claimant he has suffered grievous injuries such as fracture and to that effect he has produced - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 the medical records to show that, he has suffered a fracture of right tibia and fibula. PW.2 - Doctor has assessed the disability which is permanent in nature to the extent of 40% to the right lower limb. The Tribunal has assessed the said disability at 1/3rd to the whole body and has come to the conclusion that, he has suffered permanent functional disability to the extent of 13%. In the absence of acceptable evidence from the respondents, in view of the nature of injuries and fractures, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the disability at 13% which do not require any interference by this Court. Sofar as income of the claimant is concerned the Tribunal has assessed his income at Rs.8,000/- pm in the absence of acceptable evidence. There is no proof regarding the said income. But, however, in the absence of acceptable evidence with regard to the proof of income, as per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authorities, as the accident is of the year 2017, the notional income that is to be considered is at Rs.10,250/-. There is disability of 13%. As the claimant has suffered 13% physical disability to the whole body and as the claimant was aged 23 - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 years at the time of accident the proper multiplier that is applicable is ‘18’. Thus, the loss of income due to disability would be Rs.10,250/- x 12 months x 18 x 13/100 = Rs.2,87,820/-. Thus, towards loss of income due to disability, the claimant is entitled for the compensation of Rs.2,87,820/-. 13. Sofar as compensation towards pain and suffering, medical expenses, loss of income during laid up period and toward food, nutrition and attendant charges, loss of amenities and comforts, so also future medical expenses, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the compensation based upon judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Raj Kumar supra. As the Tribunal has rightly assessed the compensation towards other heads, no interference called for. Thus, the claimant is held entitled for the compensation as under: Sl. No. Different Heads under which compensation is awarded Amount In Rs. 1. Pain and suffering 20,000-00 2. Medical expenses 6,933-00 3. Loss due to physical disability 2,87,820-00 - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 4. Loss of income during laid up period 8,000-00 5. Towards food, nutrition and attendant charges, loss of comforts and amenities 20,000-00 6. Future Medical expenses 20,000-00 Total 3,62,753-00 14. As it is held that the said accident has taken place because of rash and negligent driving of the offending Swift Car by its driver owned by respondent No.1 insured with respondent No.2, both the respondents are held liable to pay the compensation. However, respondent No.2 to deposit the compensation before the Tribunal as there is no proof of violation of policy conditions. Accordingly, the point raised supra is answered party in the affirmative. 15. Resultantly, we pass the following: ORDER i. Appeal filed by the Appellant/claimant is allowed in part. ii. The impugned judgment and award passed in MVC No.2236/2017 dated 24.04.2019 - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 passed by the I Additional District Judge, and MACT II, Belagavi, is hereby modified. iii. The claimant is held entitled for a total compensation of Rs.3,62,753/- as against Rs.2,99,600/- thereby, there would be enhancement of Rs.63,153/- as compensation together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realisation. iv. Respondent nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation, however, respondent no.2 to deposit the compensation within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. v. As the amount so awarded is meager and already more than 5 years have been lapsed after the accident, the Tribunal is directed to release the entire amount to the claimant to meet his expenses. vi. There shall be a modified award accordingly. - 12 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:2898-DB MFA No. 105154 of 2019 vii. Registry to transmit the trial Court records to the concerned Tribunal along with the copy of this judgment forthwith. SD/- (B.M.SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SD/- (RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR) JUDGE AM/CT:VG LIST NO.: 3 SL NO.: 19