- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14812 MFA No. 102866 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102866 OF 2014 (MV-I) BETWEEN: NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., ISSUING BRANCH OFFICE, SY.NO.213/2B, PLOT NO.3, MUNAVALLI COMPLEX, NEAR COURT CIRCLE, LAXMI TEMPLE ROAD, GOKAK, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELGAUM, THROUGH THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FIRST FLOOR, PRABHU BLDG., P.B. NO.175, RAMDEV GALLI, BELGAUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, II FLOOR, ARIHANT PLAZA, KESHWAPUR, HUBLI. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. SHARMILA M. PATIL, ADVOCATE) GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.11.05 12:39:16 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14812 MFA No. 102866 of 2014 AND: 1. SHRI RAMA S/O. PARASHURAM PAWAR, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: NOW NIL, R/O: DESHMUKH PIMPRI, TQ/DIST: PARABAGI, MAHARASHTRA STATE. 2. SHRI BHIMAPPA BALAPPA LAXMESHWAR, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: AGRICULTURE & BUSINESS, R/O: KULAGOD VILLAGE, TQ: GOKAK, DIST: BELGAUM. (OWNER OF HMT TRACTOR BEARING ITS REGISTRATION NO.KA-27/T-2317) …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. DEEPAK S. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. NAVEEN R. MELINAMANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO CALL THE RECORDS, HEAR THE PARTIES, AND ALLOW THE APPEAL AS PRAYED FOR BY SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.07.2014 PASSED BY THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDITIONAL M.A.C.T., GOKAK IN M.V.C.NO.1426/2012, WITH COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14812 MFA No. 102866 of 2014 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) 1. Heard Smt. Sharmila M. Patil, learned counsel for the appellant, as well as Sri. Deepak S. Kulkarni, learned counsel for respondent No.1. 2. Challenge in this appeal is to the award passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gokak, in MVC No.1426/2012 dated 30.07.2014. 3. Respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the claimant’ for the sake of convenience in discussion) filed a petition claiming compensation of Rs.18,00,000/- in total, projecting that he sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident and became totally and completely disabled. The Tribunal, through the impugned award, granted a sum of Rs.6,94,856/- as compensation. The Insurance Company, against - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14812 MFA No. 102866 of 2014 whom liability is fixed, is before this Court by filing the present appeal. 4. Arguing the matter, Smt.Sharmila M. Patil, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the Tribunal awarded exorbitant sum as compensation and aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. 5. Learned counsel states that the admitted case of the claimant himself is that he was aged around 60 years by the date of the accident. Medical record produced by the claimant also establishes the said fact. However, taking the age of the claimant as 50 years, the Tribunal applied multiplier 16 and awarded a huge sum of Rs.5,26,500/- towards ‘loss of future earnings’. Learned counsel thereby seeks to pass necessary orders. 6. On the other hand, Sri.Deepak S. Kulkarni, learned counsel for the claimant submits that, due to the injuries sustained, right leg of the claimant was - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14812 MFA No. 102866 of 2014 amputated below knee. Learned counsel states that the claimant, as a Gangman, was earning Rs.10,000/- per month by the date of accident. However, the Tribunal took the notional income of the claimant as Rs.4,500/- per month and therefore, compensation granted needs enhancement. Learned counsel states that, though the claimant has not preferred any appeal, yet the Appellate Court is empowered to grant additional sum while entertaining the appeal filed by the Insurance Company. 7. It is not in dispute that the claimant sustained crush injury to his right foot, which resulted in amputation of his right leg below knee. As rightly put forth by learned counsel for the appellant, as per the documents produced by the claimant himself, his age was around 60 years on the date of accident. But taking the age of the claimant as 50 years, the Tribunal applied the multiplier 13. Indeed, taking the age of the claimant as 60 years as on the date of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14812 MFA No. 102866 of 2014 accident, the Tribunal ought to have applied multiplier 9. But the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.13,500/- only towards ‘loss of earnings during laid-up period’. For a person who loses one of his lower limbs, though up to below knee, it would take not less than 7 to 8 months to stand on one leg, to practice walking and to attend to his normal duties. Therefore, the amount awarded towards ‘loss of income during laid-up period’, i.e., Rs. 13,500/-, is grossly low. 8. Also this Court is of the view that the amount granted towards ‘food and attendant charges’, i.e., Rs.6,000/-, is on lower side. The Tribunal failed to award any sum as compensation for conveyance charges, which the claimant would have incurred during the course of treatment. Thus, considering all these facts, this Court is of the view that there are no grounds to reduce the sum that is awarded as compensation by the Tribunal. Equally, this Court does not find any grounds for enhancement. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14812 MFA No. 102866 of 2014 9. Therefore, the appeal stands dismissed. 10. Amount, if any in deposit, be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal immediately. Sd/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE gab CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44