- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13399 MFA No. 101269 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101269 OF 2015 (MV-I) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. JAINABI W/O HASSANASAB BEPARI AGE:45 YEARS, OCC:WORKING IN MEAT SHOP, NOW NILL, R/O NESARGI, TQ:BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. HANAMANT R LATUR, ADV) AND: 1. SHRI. BHIMAPPA S/O LAXMAN BASARIMARAD AGE:50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. GAJAMNAL, TQ:BAILHONGAL, DIST: BELAGAVI. 2. SHRI. JAMEEAHAMED S/O ABDULKADHAR MURASAL, AGE:50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O P.B. ROAD, SANKESHWAR 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., 2ND FLOOR, MARUTI GALLI, BELAGAVI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.K. KAYAKAMATH, ADV FOR R3 NOTICE TO R1 & R2 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.02.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.1283/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER ADDL. MACT, BAILHONGAL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13399 MFA No. 101269 of 2015 THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI) This appeal is filed by the petitioner, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in MVC No.1283/2012 vide judgment and award dated 18.02.2015 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Bailhongal (‘Tribunal’ for short) 2. Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: 2.1. On 04.02.2012, the petitioner and her husband were returning towards Nesargi Village from meat packing centre on their motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-24/H-3610. The petitioner was a pillion rider and her husband Hasansab Bepari was riding the motorcycle. At that time, near the accident spot, the driver of a tempo trax bearing - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13399 MFA No. 101269 of 2015 Reg.No.KA-25/M-4839 came from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the motorcycle. As a result, the petitioner has sustained the grievous injuries. Hence, filed a claim petition. 3. Respondents No.1 and 2 appeared through the counsel, but they did not choose to file a statement of objections. The Tribunal has taken the statement of objections as not filed. 4. The Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the driver of the offending vehicle did not possess a valid and effective driving licence as of the date of accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the Insurance Company. 5. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13399 MFA No. 101269 of 2015 6. The petitioner, to substantiate her case, examined herself as PW-1, examined the Doctor as PW-2 and marked 128 documents as Exs. P1 to P128. In rebuttal, the respondents have not led any oral evidence, but the Insurance Company marked document as Ex.R1 with consent. 7. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part and awarded a compensation of Rs.5,39,000/- with current and future interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on Rs.4,89,000/- from the date of petition till deposit and the respondents were held jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the petitioner. Further, the Tribunal directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount. 8. The petitioner, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, filed this appeal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13399 MFA No. 101269 of 2015 9. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Insurance Company. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the accident is of the year 2012; the Tribunal has taken the notional income at Rs.5,000/- which is on the lower side. He submits that, in the absence of income proof, the Tribunal should have taken the notional income as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The petitioner was aged about 42 years as of the date of of incident. The multiplier applicable to his age group is ‘14’. He also submits that, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the other heads is also on the lower side. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal. 11. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that, the petitioner examined the Doctor as PW-2, but he is not the treated doctor. He has issued the disability certificate. The Tribunal has rightly assessed the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13399 MFA No. 101269 of 2015 disability at 30%, which is just and proper. Hence, on this ground, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 12. Perused the records and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The point that arises for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation. 13. There is no dispute about the occurrence of accident and also injuries sustained by the petitioner in the road traffic accident. The petitioner has produced the charge sheet marked as Ex.P6, which discloses that, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. Reg. Quantum of compensation: 14. The petitioner submits that, she was working in a meat shop and was earning Rs.8,000/- per month. To substantiate her case, the petitioner has not produced any income proof. The petitioner was aged about 42 years as of the date of accident. The multiplier applicable to her age - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13399 MFA No. 101269 of 2015 group is ‘14’ as per the proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another1. The accident is of the year 2012. As per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, this court assesses the notional income at Rs.6,500/-. The petitioner, to prove the disability, examined the Doctor as PW-2, who has deposed that he had examined the petitioner clinically and radiologically and he has recorded the findings regarding the injuries sustained by the petitioner as follows: i. Grievous & Multiple injuries to right shoulder, ii. Punctured wound over the right thigh L/3rd, iii. Contusion to right thigh, iv. Fracture 1/3rd femur right with intrachantricular extention, v. Fracture of left leg shaft of Tibia, vi. Fracture and dislocation of right humorus, vii. Injury to chest and other multiple injuries all over the body. 1 (2009) 6 SCC 121 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13399 MFA No. 101269 of 2015 He has opined that, the petitioner has suffered permanent physical disability to the extent of 45% to the right lower limb, 35% to the left limb and 25% to the right upper limb, and the Tribunal has considered the same and assessed the disability at 30% which is on the lower side. This Court, considering the evidence of PW-2 and medical records, re- assesses the disability at 40%. 15. This court re-assesses the compensation under the following heads: Compensation awarded in Rs. Particulars By the Tribunal By this Court Pain and sufferings 85,000 1,00,000 Loss of amenities and future unhappiness 25,000 40,000 Medical expenses 1,02,000 1,02,000 Incidental expenses 25,000 30,000 Loss of income during laid-up and rest period 20,000 19,500 (Rs.6,500/- x 3) - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13399 MFA No. 101269 of 2015 Loss of future income 2,52,000 4,36,800 (6,500/- x 12 x 14 x 40%) Future medical expenses 50,000 50,000 Total 5,39,000 7,78,300 Enhanced by this Court 2,39,300 Thus, the petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.7,78,300/- as against Rs.5,39,000/-. The petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.2,39,300/-. 16. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed-in-part; ii. The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is hereby modified; iii. The petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.2,39,300/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realisation; - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:13399 MFA No. 101269 of 2015 iv. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; v. Trial Court records be transmitted to the Tribunal, forthwith; vi. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE PA CT: BSB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14