- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27107 MFA No. 1703 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. 1703/2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI S B UMESH S/O BETTASWAMAIAH, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS R/AT NO.73,3RD CROSS, KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR, NEAR ST.JOHNS PUBLIC SCHOOLS, BYDRAHALLI, BENGALURU-560 091. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. JAYARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMTED, NO.19, RELIANCE CENTRE, WALCHAND HIRACHAND MARG, BALLARD ESTATE,MUMBAI-400 001 GEE PLAZ,AIRPORT ROAD, YERAWADA,PUNE-411 006 REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, ALSO AT : REGIONAL OFFICE RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NO.28, 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, EAST WING, NEAR CITI BANK, M.G.ROAD, Digitally signed by KORLAHALLI BHARATHIDEVIKRISHNACHARYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27107 MFA No. 1703 of 2015 BENGLAURU-560 001. 2. SHIVALINGAIAH K P S/O PUTTARAMAIAH, NO.1325, 2ND STAGE, KAMALANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 079. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAKSHITHA S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R1, VIDE ORDER DATED 21.02.2022, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.11.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.621/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, 26TH ACMM, (SCCH-09), MACT, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, 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 18th November 2014, passed by the learned Judge, Court of Small Causes and M.A.C.T., Bengaluru (SCCH-09) (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.621/2013, seeking enhancement of compensation. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27107 MFA No. 1703 of 2015 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 05.06.2012, at about 6.30 p.m., claimant was going on motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-02-EJ-3582. When he reached near Pooja Kalyana Mantapa, Magadi main road, Kamakshipalya, a car bearing registration No.KA-04-MC-2791, came in a rash and negligent manner and hit the motorcycle. As a result, claimant fell down and sustained fractures. He took treatment as an inpatient in Chitanya Hospital. He was a businessman and was earning Rs.25,000/- per month. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident he has suffered permanent disability. With these reasons, the claimant has prayed for awarding of compensation. 4. The respondent No.2 is the owner and respondent No.1 is the insurer of the offending motorcycle. Respondent No.2 remained ex parte before the Tribunal. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27107 MFA No. 1703 of 2015 Respondent No.1 filed its written statement denying the contentions of the claim petitioner and also denied its liability to pay the compensation due to breach of terms and conditions of the policy of insurance. With these reasons, it prayed to dismiss the claim petition. 5. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues. 6. The claimant to prove his case, examined two witnesses as PW-1 and PW-2 and marked 14 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-14. Respondent No.2 has not lead any oral or documentary evidence. 7. 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 35,000/- Medical expenses 36,000/- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27107 MFA No. 1703 of 2015 Attendant charges, nutritious expenses and transportation charges 3,000/- Loss of future income due to permanent disability 1,01,000/- Loss of income during laid up period 15,000/- Loss of future amenities and unhappiness 10,000/- Total 2,00,000/- Being aggrieved by the said award passed by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed the present appeal for enhancement of compensation. 8. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the claimant as well as the insurer. 9. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate; The Tribunal has not considered the income of the claimant properly and the disability assessed is also on the lower side; The compensation awarded under other heads are also on the lower side. Hence, prayed for enhancement of the compensation. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27107 MFA No. 1703 of 2015 10. Learned counsel for respondent No.1-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. 11. Following points arise for my determination: (ii) Whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation? (ii) What order? Point No.1 : 12. 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 Tribunal in the impugned judgment assessed the age of the claimant as 44 years at the time of the accident, taken his income as Rs.6,000/- per month, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27107 MFA No. 1703 of 2015 applied the multiplier of `14', assessed the disability as 10% to the whole body and awarded the compensation. 14. On re-appreciating the evidence available on record, the amount of compensation under some of the heads are on the lower side. As per Ex.P-7 - wound certificate, the claimant had sustained following injuries : i) fracture of left acetabulum, ii) fracture of superior and inferior ramus left with fracture of illus left, iii) bilateral communited fracture of calcaneum. PW-2 has treated the claimant. He assessed the disability suffered by the claimant as 45% to the left lower limb and 20% to the right ankle, and total disability assessed as 20% to the whole body. Considering the age, occupation and fractures sustained by the claimant, the permanent disability can be assessed as 15% to the whole body. 15. The claimant contended that he was earning Rs.25,000/- per month, but he was unable to prove the - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27107 MFA No. 1703 of 2015 same. Following the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the income of the claimant is taken as Rs.7,000/- per month. Undisputedly, the age of the claimant was 44 years and the multiplier applicable is `14'. 16. For the aforesaid discussions, the claimant is entitled to following amount of compensation : Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and suffering 60,000/- Medical expenses 36,000/- Attendant expenses, special diet and conveyance charges 20,000/- Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.7,000/- x 3) 21,000/- Loss of income due to permanent disability (Rs.7,000/- x 12 x 14 x 15%) 1,76,400/- Loss of amenities 25,000/- Total 3,38,400/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal Enhancement- Rounded off - 2,00,000/- 1,38,400/- 1,39,000/- - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27107 MFA No. 1703 of 2015 The claimant is also entitled to interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation. 17. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the said amount of compensation. Accordingly, point No.1 is answered partly in the affirmative. 18. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated 18th November 2014, passed by the Judge, Court of Small Cases and MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-09), in MVC No.621/2013, stands modified. iii) The claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,39,000/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:27107 MFA No. 1703 of 2015 iv) The respondent No.1 - Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award. v) The remaining portion of the award of the Tribunal shall remain unaltered. 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.: 34