- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50812 MFA No. 6381 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6381 OF 2022 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. DURJAN KASHYAP S/O BUTU KASHYAP AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT NO. RAJADONGARIPARA BAGHMOHALAI, BASTAR, CHHATISGARH - 494 223. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K.T, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. IFFCO TOKIO GEN INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SRI SHANTHI TOWERS NO. 141, 5TH FLOOR, 3RD MAIN, EAST TO NGEF LAYOUT, KASTURINAGAR BENGALURU - 560 043, REP. BY ITS MANAGER. 2. MUTHU S/O RAJENDRA PERIAJANA R/AT NO. 93, BHEL LAYOUT, EXTENSION, PATTANAGERE BENGALURU - 560 098. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D. VIJAYKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 13.11.2025, NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 08.06.2022 IN MVC NO.2736/2021 ON THE FILE OF THE XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50812 MFA No. 6381 of 2022 COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU CITY, (SCCH-4), 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 MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 08th June 2022, passed by the XVIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, MACT, Bengaluru City, (SCCH-4), (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.2736/2021, seeking enhancement of compensation. 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 25.01.2021, around 09.30 a.m., the claimant while crossing the road, met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle bearing registration No.KA-41-B-6328. As a result, he sustained - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50812 MFA No. 6381 of 2022 grievous injuries and suffered permanent disability. With these reasons, prayed to award the compensation. 4. Respondent No.1-insurer denied the petition averments and denied its liability to pay the compensation. With these reasons, 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 12 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-12. Respondents have not led any oral and documentary evidence. 7. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties and appreciating the materials available on record, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle by its driver and awarded the following amount of compensation: - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50812 MFA No. 6381 of 2022 Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of future income 4,53,600/- Loss of income during laid up period and attendant charges 30,000/- Conveyance charges 20,000/- Pain and suffering 60,000/- Food nourishment, attendant charges and loss of amenities 20,000/- Total 5,83,600/- 8. The appellant-petitioner found that the said amount of compensation is inadequate. Therefore, he preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation. 9. The fact of the accident, injury sustained by the claimant, his age and the multiplier applicable to the facts of the case are not seriously disputed. The main grievance of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the disability assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side. According to the evidence of PW.2, the claimant had sustained permanent disability to an extent of 56% to the whole body. Since he sustained head injury and suffering - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50812 MFA No. 6381 of 2022 from hemiparesis of right side, the Tribunal ought to have taken the disability at 56%, as stated by PW.2. It is further contended that the amount of compensation awarded under the other heads are also on the lower side and no amount of compensation was awarded under the head loss of amenities and future unhappiness. Therefore, prayed to enhance the compensation. 10. Learned counsel for respondent No.1-insurer supports the impugned judgment and submits that it does not call for any interference by this Court. He further contends that, at the most, disability may be considered at 30% to whole body. At the request of learned counsel for respondent No.1, the appellant-petitioner was directed to be present before the Court for physical verification of the disability. The claimant has appeared before the Court, on the date of hearing. 11. Looking at the materials available on record, the contention of the appellant is tenable. PW.2 has assessed disability and according to him, the claimant is - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50812 MFA No. 6381 of 2022 suffering from right hemiparesis with muscle power graded at 3-4/5. He has also stated that after considering the MRI brain and CT scan, he assessed the disability at 56% to the whole body. The claimant has also produced the MRI scan along with the report issued by the concerned technician/doctor. 12. It appears that the Tribunal has assessed only 1/3rd of the disability stated by PW.2. The claimant sustained head injuries and is suffering from right side hemiparesis. Under those circumstances, the question of reduction of the disability to 1/3rd when comparing to the whole body is not permissible. It appears the concerned doctor has furnished the Gazette Notification issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, which prescribes that in cases of hemiparesis, if it is mild then the physical impairment is 25%, 50% if it is moderate and 75% if severe. Looking to the movement of the claimant, who is present in the Court, it appears to be between mild and moderate. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50812 MFA No. 6381 of 2022 Therefore, his permanent disability is taken to the whole body as 40%. 13. The Tribunal has taken loss of income during laid up period only for two months, which is on the lower side. At least four to five months, he might not be in a position to attend to his work. The Tribunal has also not awarded any amount towards loss of amenities. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- under the head food, nourishment and attendant charges etc., along with loss of amenities. The claimant had taken treatment as an inpatient for 16 days, at Sri Sai Hospital, Bangalore, which is the private and charitable hospital. Therefore, no medical bills were produced before the Court for considering the same. Looking at the said facts and also disability suffered by the claimant, the amount awarded under the said head is on the lower side, which requires enhancement. 14. The amount of compensation awarded under the head pain and suffering is also on the lower side. As - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50812 MFA No. 6381 of 2022 already stated above, the claimant has been suffering from hemiparesis and has been suffering from the consequence of the incident till this day or it may extend till his lifetime. Therefore, the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Considering the above said factors, the claimant is entitled to the following amount of compensation: Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and sufferings 1,00,000/- Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.15,000/- x 4) 60,000/- Special diet and attendant charges 20,000/- Conveyance charges 20,000/- Loss of future earning capacity due to disability (Rs.15,000/- x 12 x 14x 40%) 10,08,000 Loss of amenities 50,000/- Total 12,58,000/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal Enhancement- Rounded off- 5,83,600/- 6,74,400/- 6,75,000/- - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50812 MFA No. 6381 of 2022 15. The claimant is entitled to interest on the enhanced amount of compensation at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till its realisation. Undisputedly, respondents are liable to pay the said amount. 16. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated 08th June 2022, passed in MVC.No.2736/2021, by the XVIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, MACT, Bengaluru City, (SCCH- 4), stands modified; iii) The claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.6,75,000/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization. iv) The respondent No.1 - Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50812 MFA No. 6381 of 2022 v) The remaining portion of the award is not disturbed. vi) Draw award accordingly. vii) Since the appeal is disposed of, I.A.No.1/2025 does survive for consideration. Accordingly, it is disposed of. Registry is directed to send back the records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE AMA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14