- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37405 MFA No. 6036 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6036 OF 2024 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. UMESH S/O NINGEGOWDA @LINGEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS RESIDING AT SULLERI VILLAGE VIRUPAKSHAPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GOPALAKRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR MS. SUSHMITHA G, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. RAMESH S/O BETTEGOWDA MAJOR IN AGE RESIDING AT N.10/1, MENGALLI VILLAGE, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT - 562 160. Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37405 MFA No. 6036 of 2024 2. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE (LEGAL MANAGER ) NO. 144, SUBBURAO COMPLEX, 2241/4 M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 - VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 18.09.2025, NOTICE IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.04.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO. 325/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ADDITIONAL MACT, CHANNAPATNA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37405 MFA No. 6036 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT At request of Sri. Gopalakrishna who appears through video conference and represents Ms. Sushmitha.G learned counsel on record for the appellant and Sri. Janardhan reddy learned counsel for respondent No.2 who appears before this Court physically, the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal. 2. On the ground that the compensation that is granted by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Channapatna through orders in M.V.C. No.325/2016 dated 20.04.2024 is grossly low, the claimant therein is before this Court seeking enhancement in compensation. 3. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant made his submission with regard to the percentage of disability that was assessed by the tribunal in respect of whole body of the appellant, the amount granted towards loss of income during laid up period, failure to award any compensation towards loss of amenities in life and in respect of future medical expenses - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37405 MFA No. 6036 of 2024 that was granted by the tribunal. Learned counsel contends that the disability in respect of whole body is required to be taken as 70%. Learned counsel also states that the appellant is entitled for compensation under the head loss of amenities in life and he is also in requirement of additional sum under the head loss of income during laid up period and towards future medical expenses. 4. On the other hand learned counsel for respondent No.2 states that basing on the evidence produced the tribunal granted justifiable sum as compensation and therefore the appeal is not maintainable. 5. By all the evidence produced, the appellant succeeded in establishing that he sustained segmental communited fracture ulna with dislocation of radial head of right elbow. The evidence of PW-2 is that the appellant is suffering from physical impairment of 54% in respect of right upper limb. Considering the totality of evidence produced, the tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 15% which needs no interference. So far as - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37405 MFA No. 6036 of 2024 the notional income assessed by the tribunal that is Rs.9,000/- is required to be enhanced to Rs.9,500/- in the light of the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that for the relevant period the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as Rs.9,500/- per month for settlement of claims. Thus, taking the notional income of the appellant as Rs.9,500/- per month and without distributing other parameters that is application of appropriate multiplier '14' and the disability in respect of whole body as 15%, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive under the head loss of future earnings is Rs.2,39,400 (9,500 x 12 x 14 x 15%). However, the tribunal granted a sum of Rs.2,26,800/- only under the said head. Thus, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.12,600/- (2,39,400/- - 2,26,800/-) under the head loss of future earnings. 6. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained this Court is of the view that the appellant would have - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37405 MFA No. 6036 of 2024 taken bed rest atleast for a period of 4 months. Thus, loss of earnings during laid up period comes to Rs.38,000/- (9,500 x 4). The tribunal granted a sum of Rs.18,000/- only under the said head. Thus, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.20,000 (38,000 - 18,000) under the head loss of income during laid up period. Also this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities in life. The award of the tribunal in all other aspects is valid and holds good. 7. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.42,600/- (12,600 + 20,000+ 10,000) in addition to the sum that is awarded by the tribunal. Thus, the appeal is disposed of with the following:- ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The compensation that is granted by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Channapatna - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:37405 MFA No. 6036 of 2024 through orders in M.V.C. No.325/2016 dated 20.04.2024 is enhanced by Rs.42,600/-. 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.2 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 VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6 CT: BHK