- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35104 MFA No. 2246 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2246 OF 2024(MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. SUMANTH H. S., S/O SWAMYGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT NO.2091-1, D-43, 2091/1 D-44, SEBAIAH ROAD, DEVARAJA MOHALLA, MYSURU CITY - 573 116. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHANKAR H.S., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ROHITH B. J.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. RAJESH T., S/O. THIMMEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT SEETHA SUBBAIAH NILAYA, HOUSING BOARD KUSHALNAGAR, SOMWARPET TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT - 573 116. 2. HANEEFA P. K., S/O. KAMARUDDIN, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/AT M.G.COLONY, NELLIHUDIKERE VILLAGE, MADIKERI TALUK, KODAGU DISTRICT - 571253. Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35104 MFA No. 2246 of 2024 3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, T.P.HUB, BALLAL CIRCLE, CHAMARAJAPURAM, MYSORE - 570 005, THE MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JWALA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B.A. RAMAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R3; V/O. DATED 24.09.2024, NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 ARE DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.11.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1093/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35104 MFA No. 2246 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Shankar H.S., who represents Sri.Rohit B.J., learned counsel on record for the appellant as well as Sri.B.A. Ramakrishna, learned counsel for respondent No.3. 2. Challenge in this appeal is the order that is rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mysuru, in MVC No.1093/2019 dated 25.11.2023. This is a claimant's appeal. 3. As against the claim for Rs.48,25,000/-, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.3,05,800/- as compensation and aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. 4. Making his submission with regard to merits of the matter, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant sustained grievous injury to his right foot. The said injury resulted in amputation of 2nd and 3rd toe. Such amputation resulted in disfigurement. Further, the appellant took extensive treatment for the said injury. Though sufficient material was produced before the Tribunal regarding the disfigurement, the disability, the nature of treatment taken and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35104 MFA No. 2246 of 2024 the loss of earnings, yet the Tribunal awarded meager sum as compensation and aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. Learned counsel ultimately seeks for enhancement of compensation. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that the Tribunal awarded justifiable sum as compensation under each head and therefore the award needs no interference. 6. The Tribunal granted a sum of Rs.3,05,761/- rounded off to Rs.3,05,800/- as compensation divided under the following heads: Sl. No Heads of compensation Amount in Rs. 1 Medical expenses 65,761.00 2 Pain and sufferings 25,000.00 3 Loss of future earnings 1,27,500.00 4 Loss of amenities and enjoyment in life 20,000.00 5 Conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges 30,000.00 6 Loss of earning during the period of treatment and rest 37,500.00 Total 3,05,761.00 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35104 MFA No. 2246 of 2024 7. The appellant succeeded in establishing that he sustained degloving injury to the right foot and fracture of metatarsal bone of the right foot. The appellant also succeeded in establishing that he took extensive treatment including skin grafting. It is not in dispute that the 2nd and 3rd toes were found absent by PW2 on his examination during the course of assessing disability. The Tribunal took the functional disability in respect of whole body as 5% which needs no interference. However, having considered the nature of injury sustained, this Court is of the view that, the appellant would have taken bed rest atleast for a period of four months. However, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.37,500/- only under the head loss of earnings during the laid up period. Also this Court is of the view that, the Tribunal is not justified in awarding a sum of Rs.25,000/- only under the head pain and suffering. Admittedly, there is disfiguration. Therefore, having considered all these aspects, this Court is of the view that, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.1,00,000/- globally. Thus, the appeal is disposed of with the following - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35104 MFA No. 2246 of 2024 ORDER i) The appeal is allowed in part. ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mysuru, through orders in MVC No.1093/2019 dated 25.11.2023 is enhanced by Rs.1,00,000/-. iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. iv) Respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. v) On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE AP CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 92