- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6137 OF 2024 (MV-I) BETWEEN: REYAZ S/O AMANULLA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT OLD RESIDENT OF MADAKASIRA VILLAGE, ANANTHAPURA DISTRICT-515 001 NOW PRESENT R/AT, NAGAVALLI VILLAGE, HEBBUR HOBLI, TUMAKURU DISTRICT …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN DODDABASAVARAJAPPA RYAKHA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. KISHIN ROY S/O NOT KNOWN AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.36, LG, 2ND STAGE, KHB COLONY BASAVESHWARA NAGARA BENGALORE-572 001 Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 2. THE MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COM. LTD. OFFICE AT KANAKAPURA, JAYANAGAR 6TH BLOCK, JAYANAGARA BENGALORE-560 070 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.ASHOK N. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2 V/O/DATED: 10/12/2024- NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.02.03.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.1254/2024 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MACT, TUMAKURU, 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 SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC.No.1254/2021 dated 02.03.2024 by the II Addl. District Judge & AMACT, Tumakuru, the claimant is before this court seeking enhancement of the compensation. 2. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.25.00 lakhs for the injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident. The facts of the case are on 17.08.2021 at about 11.00 a.m. the claimant and his wife were proceeding in a bike at the left side of the road, at that time driver of the lorry came in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and hit to the said bike and caused the accident. As a result the claimant sustained grievous injuries. 3. The Tribunal had granted compensation as per the table given below: SL. No. Heads Compensation Awarded 1. Pain and suffering : Rs. 60,000/- 2. Medical Expenses : Rs. 3,29,730/- 3. Food, diet, Nourishment and conveyance : Rs. 27,000/- - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 4. Future Medical Expenses : Rs. 40,000/- 5. Loss of income during laid period : Rs. 60,000/- 6. Loss of future income : Rs. 8,37,000/- 7. Disappointment and Discomfort : Rs. 30,000/- Total : Rs. 13,83,730/- 4. As per the evidence, the claimant sustained following injuries: i. Comminuted supracondylar fracture of right ii. Distal 1/3rd fracture in left tibia iii. Comminute fracture of left calcanium iv. Haemolytic Anemia Claimant was operated on 18.08.2021 with i. ORIF with LCP and Tens Nail to right femur ii. CRIF with ILIM nailing to left tibia Fracture calcaneum treated conservatively and he was discharged on 25.08.2021. Recently he was examined on 16.08.2023. On examination, claimant complained that limp both lower limbs, Pain in left leg, ankle foot and also complaint of difficulty in walking, sitting on floor, sitting on cross leg, climbing stairs. X-ray shows mal united fracture of right femur, mal united fracture of the left calcaneum. The doctor has - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 opined that the disability of right lower limb is 45% and left lower limb is 48% and the whole body disability is 31%. In support of chief-examination, he has also produced the documents as a case sheet, OPD card, 3 x-ray film and disability assessment chart. The tribunal had taken the disability at 31%. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that the future prospects were not awarded by the Tribunal and the loss of income that is considered only for four months which is on the lower side and considering the disability at 31%, the loss of amenities that is granted by the Tribunal is not a reasonable compensation. It is submitted that under the head of pain and suffering and on all the accounts, the compensation needs to be enhanced. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/ insurance company submits that the claimant is not entitled for future prospects. It is submitted that there is no evidence on record to show that the claimant who is the driver has surrendered his driving license and he is no more driving the vehicle. There is no evidence on record to show that the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 claimant is not able to drive the vehicle. In these circumstances, question of granting future prospects would not arise. Learned counsel had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of Anup Maheshwari vs. Oriental insurance Company Limited and others arising out of Civil Appeal No.12099/2024. It is submitted that in the said case the disability was taken at 50%, but the future prospects were not considered, and he has relied on paragraph No.9 reads as follows: “9. However, since just compensation is granted, we do not find any reason to award compensation for loss of future prospectus. It is clear that the claimant though has suffered a disability, which has been determined to be 50%, there is no Page 8 of 11 Civil Appeal Nos.12098-12099 of 2024 difficulty in continuing with the business and the claimant has also been fitted with a prosthetic leg which ensures his mobility and continuance of the business. The 40% enhancement in the annual income for taking into account the future prospects is found to be improper, especially in the context of 50% disability having been reckoned for the purpose of loss of earning capacity and the claimant enabled to continue his business”. It is submitted that in those circumstances, the Hon’ble Apex Court has refused to grant future prospects and it will be applied to the facts of this case and the claimant is not entitled for any future prospects. It is submitted that on all other counts the amount of compensation that is awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 7. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. The first submission of the counsel for the appellant/claimant is that the future prospect is not considered. It is the submission of the insurance company that he is not entitled for the future prospects as he has not placed any evidence on record to show that he has quit the driving and he is not in a position to continue the earlier occupation. In those circumstances, the judgment referred Supra in Anoop Maheshwari case applies to the facts of this case. This Court is not able to appreciate the submission that is made on behalf of the insurance company. As per the settled law, wherever the disability is above 20%, the Courts are considering the future prospects. In the facts and circumstances of that case, the Hon’ble Apex Court has not granted future prospects that cannot be considered as a ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court and that cannot be applied to the facts and circumstances of this case. There is no dispute about the fact that the claimant is a driver, he has suffered 48% disability to the right lower limb and 45% to the left lower limb. Altogether, the claimant has suffered 93% disability to - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 the limb and he was working as a driver, a disability of 93% to the limb without any doubt, it will have an impact on a person’s life, his efficiency, his mobility, just because the driving license is not surrendered, that cannot be a reason for the Court to not to grant the future prospects. Hence, in view of the above, this Court is of the view that the appellant/claimant is entitled for future prospects. 8. The accident occurred in the year 2021, this court is taking income at Rs.15,000/- and 40% future prospects would come to Rs.6,000/- that would come to (Rs.15,000/- + Rs.6,000/-) Rs.21,000/-. Under the head of loss of future income, this court is granting an amount of Rs.11,71,800/- (21,000x12x15x31/100). Under the head of pain and suffering the Tribunal had granted an amount of Rs.60,000/- and this Court is granting an amount of Rs.70,000/-. No interference is called for a medical expenses, incidental expenses and future medical expenses. Coming to the loss of income during laid up period, this Court is inclined to grant for five months (Rs.15,000 x 5) would come to an amount of Rs.75,000/-. Coming to the amenities, considering - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 the disability at 31% to the whole body, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.50,000/-. 9. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala Vs. M. Malathi and Another1, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. 10. The claimant is entitled for compensation for an amount of Rs. 17,73,513/- under the following heads: Sl. No. Heads Compensation Awarded by Tribunal Compensation Awarded by this Court 1. Pain and suffering Rs. 60,000/- 70,000/- 2. Medical Expenses Rs. 3,29,730/- 3,29,730/- 3. Food, diet, Nourishment and conveyance Rs. 27,000/- 27,000/- 4. Future Medical Expenses Rs. 40,000/- 40,000/- 5. Loss of income during laid period Rs. 60,000/- 75,000/- 6. Loss of future income Rs. 8,37,000/- 11,71,800/- 7. Loss of amenities Rs. 00/- 50,000/- 8. Disappointment and Discomfort Rs. 30,000/- 00/- 1 (2014) 11 SCC 178 - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 9. Legal Expenses Rs. 00/- 10,000/- TOTAL Rs. 13,83,730/- 17,73,530/- i. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimant is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation from an amount ii. of Rs.13,83,730/- to Rs.17,73,530/- iii. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. iv. The respondent-Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the amount as per the award. v. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. vi. The delay of *58 days is condoned by order dated *10.12.2024. * Corrected vide chamber order dated: 30.01.2026. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45110 MFA No. 6137 of 2024 vii. No costs. viii. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE TS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45