- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29944 MFA No. 10218 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 10218/2013 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI UNIKRISHNAN V S, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, S/O SOMAN,R/AT NO.202,L-3, SURYA CITY,ANEKAL ROAD, CHANDAPURA, ANEKAL TALUK, BANGALORE DISTRICT PERMANENT R/O: NO.492 (7/238)VELASSERIL, 4,KIIDNAGOOR PANCHAYAT, KERALA STATE. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MAHESH SHETTY., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ICICI LOMBARD MOTOR INSURANCE CO LTD., NO.89, 2ND FLOOR, SVR COMPLEX, MADIWALA-HOSUR MAIN ROAD, KORAMANGALA, BANGALORE-560 068. 2. SRI GUNASHEKARAN, S/O ATTIRAMULU, R/O NO.41, EASWARI NAGAR, 2ND CROSS, WARD.1, HOSUR, KRISHNAGIRI, TAMIL NADU-635 124. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. PADMA .S UHUR., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ASHOKA N. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1, V/O DTD: 13.01.2015, SERVICE OF NOTICE TO R2 D/W) Digitally signed by MADHURI S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29944 MFA No. 10218 of 2013 THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 22.6.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.1607/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE 9TH ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT-7, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE, 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 MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 22.06.2021 passed in MVC No.1607/2011, by 9th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Member MACT-7, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, for enhancing the compensation. 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.1- Insurance Company. Notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29944 MFA No. 10218 of 2013 3. The status of the parties before the Tribunal is retained for the sake of convenience. 4. It is the case of injury. The petitioner aged 21 years, was working as a machine operator and was earning salary of Rs.4,500/- per month. As per the evidence of PW2 and PW3 doctors, the petitioner sustained disability of 32% to the whole body and he suffered 63.4% disability to both lower limbs. He sustained the following injuries: “i. Lacerated wound present over the left side forehead measuring 4cm x 1cm bone deep. ii. Lacerated wound present over the tongue 3cm x 1cm. iii. Avulsion present over lower 1/3rd left leg and left lateral malleolus with loss of lateral malleolus and articular of talus/distal tibia. iv. Abrasion present over left leg. v. Segmental fracture of right femur. vi. Fracture of right patella. vii. Fracture dislocation of left ankle.” 5. The trial court considered 1/3rd of 63.4% as functional disability and considered the disability as 21%. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29944 MFA No. 10218 of 2013 6. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that he sustained 3 fractures. The doctor assessed the disability as 32% to the whole body. But the trial court erred in considering the same as 21%. Admittedly, the age of the deceased was 21 years and that he was a machine operator. Considering the nature of the injuries and the evidence of PW2, this court finds that it is just and reasonable to take his disability as 32%. The order of the trial Court regarding modifying the disability to 21% is not fair and is not justified. 7. Learned counsel for appellant further stated that he was earning salary of Rs.4,500/- per month and also was getting Rs.150/- per day bata, but it was not mentioned in his evidence anywhere, as such, the trial Court rightly considered his income as Rs.4,500/- per month. He further argued that the accident occurred in the year 2011. As per the guidelines of Karnataka Legal Services Authority, his income is to be taken as Rs.6,500/- per month. But the counsel of the insurance objected the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29944 MFA No. 10218 of 2013 same on the grounds, that the income of PW1 was considered as per his own affidavit. Therefore, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the finding of income. The multiplier was taken as 18. Hence, the loss of future income is Rs.4,500/- x 12 x 18 x 32% = 3,11,040/-. As he filed medical bills to the tune of Rs.3,14,067/- the said amount was granted and future surgical expenses at Rs.20,000/- was granted. Also, as he sustained 4 grievous injuries and 3 simple injuries, hence Rs.45,000/- was granted towards pain and suffering. Towards loss of amenities the amount granted was Rs.10,000/-. He was hospitalized for 22 days, but he might not have attended any other work at least for a period of 3 months. Therefore, this court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.4,500 x 3 = Rs.13,500/- towards loss of earnings during the said period. He is also entitled of Rs.10,000/- towards attendant charges and also Rs.10,000/- towards transportation. Apart from that, this Court also finds it reasonable to grant an amount of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29944 MFA No. 10218 of 2013 Rs.2,00,000/- under the head, loss of future prospects of marriage, as he was aged 21 years and unmarried at the time of the accident. 8. Thus in all, award of compensation passed by the Tribunal is modified as under: Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total enhanced compensation of Rs.9,34,207/- along with Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of future income 3,11,040.00 Medical expenses 3,14,667.00 Future surgical expenses 20,000.00 Food and nourishment 10,000.00 Pain and suffering 45,000.00 Attendant and transportation 20,000.00 Loss of earning (laid up period) 13,500.00 Loss of future prospects of marriage 2,00,000.00 Total 9,34,207.00 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29944 MFA No. 10218 of 2013 interest as prayed for 6% p.a. as against already awarded by the Tribunal. 9. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. Appeal is allowed. ii. The judgment and award dated 22.06.2012 passed in MVC No.1607/2011 by 9th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Member MACT-7, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru is modified; iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 9,34,207.00/- along with interest at 6% p.a from the date of petition till the date of realization as against Rs.6,00,200/-. iv. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and respondent No.1 is directed to deposit - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:29944 MFA No. 10218 of 2013 the said amount within one month from the date of this order on such deposit. v. Petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. vi. 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 and vii. Draw award accordingly. Sd/-- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE AKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 75