- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11874 MFA No. 101587 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101587 OF 2015 (MV-) BETWEEN: SRI. ASHOK S/O. LAXMAN SUNAGAR AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, OCC: PRIVATE JOB (NOW NIL) R/AT: JAMBAGI KD TQ: MUDHOL-587313 DIST: BAGALKOT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ABHISHEK BANIGIDAD, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. MRUTYUNJAY TATA BANGI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. MAHESH S/O. HANAMANTAPPA HALLI AGED 38 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF VEHICLE, R/O. KOSTI GALLI, MUDHOL ROAD, JAMKHANDI, DIST: BAGALKOT. 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO.LTD., NO. 187/7, RAGHAVENDAR COMPLEX, WILSON GARDEN, HOSUR MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU-580027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. G.N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE OCMPNESATION BEING AWARDABLE INFAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT AS CLAIMED IN THE CLIAM PETITION BY ALLOWING THE PRESENENT APPEAL FILED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED BY MOTOR VEHICLES ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IX, MUDHOL, IN MVC NO.233 OF 2013 DATED 18.02.2015 IN THE INTERSET OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: uh MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Digitally signed by MOHANKUMAR B SHELAR Date: 2025.09.17 15:46:04 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11874 MFA No. 101587 of 2015 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the petitioner, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal in M.V.C.No.233/2013, vide judgment and award dated 18.02.2015 passed by the learned MACT-IX, Mudhol. 2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of this appeal are as follows: The petitioner met with an accident which occurred on 04.02.2013, while he was proceeding on a motor cycle as a pillion rider and the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of Tata Nano car bearing registration No.KA-28/TC-08, which came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the petitioner’s motorcycle. As a result, the petitioner sustained the injuries. Hence, the petitioner filed a claim petition under Section 166 of M.V. Act claiming compensation. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11874 MFA No. 101587 of 2015 3. The owner of the vehicle filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is contended that the driver of the offending vehicle possessed a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the accident and the policy was valid as of the date of the accident. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the owner of the offending vehicle. 4. The Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition and contended that the driver did not possess a valid and effective driving license as of the date of the 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. 6. The petitioner, to substantiate his case, examined himself as PW-1, examined the doctor as PW-2, and marked 161 documents as Exs.P-1 to P-161. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11874 MFA No. 101587 of 2015 Conversely, the respondents neither led any oral nor documentary evidence. 7. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgement dated 18.02.2015 and awarded a compensation of Rs.5,83,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of the petition till the date of realisation and held that the owner and the insurer of the offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and directed the insurance company to deposit the compensation amount. 8. The petitioner, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, filed this appeal. 9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned counsel for the Insurance Company. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11874 MFA No. 101587 of 2015 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in assessing the monthly income of the petitioner Rs.5,000/-, which is on the lower side. He also submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the other heads is also meagre. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal. 11. Per contra, learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in assessing the permanent disability at 25%, which is on higher side. He also submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and do not call for any interference by this Court. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the appeal. 12. Perused the records, and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 13. The point that would arise for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11874 MFA No. 101587 of 2015 14. There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident, and injuries sustained by the petitioner. The Tribunal, considering Ex.P-8, which is a certified copy of a charge sheet, has rightly recorded a finding that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle/ car. Regarding the quantum of compensation: 15. The petitioner, to prove that he has suffered a permanent disability, examined the doctor as PW-2, who deposed that he has examined the petitioner clinically and radiologically and issued a disability certificate marked as Ex.P-147, which discloses that the petitioner has suffered a permanent disability to the extent of 40% to the right lower limb and to the extent of 35% to the right upper limb. The petitioner has also produced the Injury/ Medico-legal certificate at EX-P6, wherein, it is stated that the petitioner has sustained the following injuries : 1) fracture of the shaft radius and ulna of right forearm, 2) dislocation of right hip, - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11874 MFA No. 101587 of 2015 3) CLW over right thigh and 4) CLW over right hand 16. The petitioner was admitted in the hospital as inpatient for 27 days and the doctor has opined that the petitioner has suffered a permanent disability to the extent of 40% to the right lower limb and to the extent of 35% to the right upper limb. The doctor has not given any opinion regarding the permanent disability to the whole body. The Tribal has taken the percentage of a permanent physical disability of the petitioner to an extent of 25% to the whole body. Considering the nature of the injuries and the evidence of the doctor, this Court is of the opinion that the percentage of disability assessed by the Tribunal is on the higher side and this Court reassesses the disability at 20% to the whole body. 17. The accident occurred in 2013. The petitioner, to prove the income, has not produced income proof. In the absence of income proof, this income has to be considered - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11874 MFA No. 101587 of 2015 at Rs.7,000/- as per the schedule notified by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The petitioner was aged about 28 years as of the date of the accident and the multiplier applicable to his age group is ‘17’. Accordingly, the loss of future income of the petitioner is worked out as follows: Rs.7,000 x 12 x 17 x 20% = 2,85,600/- 18. Thus, this Court, on re-assessment of the entire evidence on record, awards the following compensation : Sl.No. HEADS AMOUNT 1. Loss of future income Rs.2,85,600/- 2. Medical expenses Rs.2,75,000/- 3. Pain and suffering Rs.40,000/- 4. Loss of amenities Rs.30,000/- 5. Attendant charges Rs.15,000/- 6. Loss of income during laid up period Rs.28,000/- Total Rs.6,73,600/- Less: Compensation awarded by the Tribunal Rs.5,83,000/- Enhanced compensation Rs.90,600/- 19. Thus in all, the petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.7,87,840/- as against Rs.5,83,000/- - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11874 MFA No. 101587 of 2015 awarded by the Tribunal i.e., enhanced compensation of Rs.90,600/-. In view of the same, the point is answered accordingly. 20. In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following order: ORDER (i) The Miscellaneous First Appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The judgment and award dated 18.02.2015 passed in M.V.C.No.233/2013 by the learned M.A.C.T.-IX, Mudhol is modified. (iii) The petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.90,600/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till its realization. (iv) The respondent-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-D:11874 MFA No. 101587 of 2015 (v) The Office is directed to transmit the records to the Tribunal. Sd/- (ASHOK S. KINAGI) JUDGE NAA CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28