- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14784 MFA No. 102616 of 2015 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. 102616 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: MALLIKARJUN S/O. HUVAPPA VALMIKI, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/O: NEERALAGI, TQ: SAVANUR, NOW RESIDING AT GOKUL HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI-580025, DHARWAD DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. H.R. GUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M. AMANULLA S/O. MOHAMMAD BASHASAB, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OWNER OF THE EICHER GOODS VEHICLE, R/O: DEVARAHATTI, POST: KADLEBALU, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. SINCE DEAD BY LR’S. 1A) H. BASHASAB S/O. AMANULLA, GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Digitally signed by GIRIJA A. BYAHATTI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.11.05 12:39:15 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14784 MFA No. 102616 of 2015 AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O: DEVARAHATTI, POST: KADLEBALU, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 1B) H. SHIBBAT S/O. AMANULLA, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O: DEVARAHATTI, POST: KADLEBALU, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 2. ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE ENK COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR, HUBBALLI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.V. YAJI, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1A & R1B SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS IN M.V.C.NO.586/2013, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, HUBBALLI AND TO ENHANCE THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANTS FROM 1,39,071/- TO 10,00,000/- BY MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2015 PASSED IN M.V.C.NO.586/2013, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, AT HUBBALLI BY ENHANCING THE SAME, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14784 MFA No. 102616 of 2015 CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) Heard Sri.H.R.Gundappa, learned counsel for the appellant who appears before the Court physically. Also heard Sri.S.V.Yaji, learned counsel for respondent No.2 who appears through video conference. 2. Dissatisfied with the sum that is awarded as compensation by the Additional Motor Accident claims Tribunal, Hubli (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ in brevity) through order in M.V.C. No.586/2013 dated 13.02.2015, the present appeal is filed by the claimant therein. 3. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant sustained multiple grievous injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred in the year 2013. The appellant was working as Mason and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14784 MFA No. 102616 of 2015 was earning Rs.12,000/- per month by the date of accident. However, due to the injuries sustained, he became permanently and completely disabled. Without considering the occupation and earnings of the appellant as on the date of accident, the Tribunal took the notional income of the appellant as Rs.4,500/- per month and awarded very meager sum as compensation towards loss of earnings. Learned counsel further submits that the compensation that is granted by the Tribunal under all the heads is also grossly low. Therefore the present appeal is filed seeking enhancement. 4. The submission that is made by learned counsel for respondent No.2 is that the Tribunal having considered the nature of injuries sustained and the evidence produced awarded justifiable sum as compensation. Learned counsel states that so far as income of the appellant is concerned, the Court may adopt the figure that is considered by the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad Bench for the relevant period. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14784 MFA No. 102616 of 2015 5. Undoubtedly, the appellant failed to produce any substantive proof with regard to his occupation and earnings as on the date of accident. The accident occurred in the year 2013. For the relevant period, the High Court Legal Services Committee, Dharwad Bench is taking the notional income as Rs.7,000/- per month for settlement of claims. Therefore, this Court considers it is desirable to adopt the said figure. Though learned counsel for the appellant also argued at length in respect of the permanent physical disability and that the assessment made by the Tribunal is wrong, however, considering the evidence produced, this Court is of the view that the Tribunal did not err in taking the disability in respect of whole body as 10%. 6. Taking the age of the deceased as 35 years, the Tribunal applied the multiplier ‘17’. However, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another1, the 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121 - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14784 MFA No. 102616 of 2015 appropriate multiplier to be applied is ‘16’. Therefore, taking the notional income of the appellant as Rs.7,000/- per month, the disability in respect of whole body as 10% and applying the appropriate multiplier ‘16’, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive towards loss of future earnings is Rs.1,34,400/- (Rs.7,000 x 12 x 16 x 10%.). 7. The appellant succeeded in establishing that he sustained comminuted fracture supercondylar femur open type right, open comminuted fracture proximal 3rd Of right tibia and fractured right tibia distal 3rd with sigmental fracture (Rt) fibula. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained, this Court is of the view that the appellant could not have attended his normal pursuits at least for a period of 6 months. Therefore, loss of earnings during laid up period comes to Rs.42,000/- (Rs.7,000 x 6). Also having considered the nature of injuries sustained and the treatment taken, this Court is of the view that the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14784 MFA No. 102616 of 2015 compensation which the appellant is entitled to receive under each head is as under: Heads Amount in Rs. Towards pain and suffering 45,000.00 Towards food, extra nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges 20,000.00 Loss of future earnings 1,34,400.00 Loss of income during laid up period 42,000.00 Medical expenses 12,271.00 Loss of amenities in life 20,000.00 TOTAL 2,73,671.00 8. Thus by all the above discussion it is clear that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.2,73,671/- as compensation. Therefore, 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, Hubli through order in M.V.C. No.586/2013 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:14784 MFA No. 102616 of 2015 dated 13.02.2015 is enhanced from Rs.1,39,071/- to Rs.2,73,671/-. (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/- (CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE RH CT-MCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15