- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36481 MFA No. 256 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.256 OF 2025 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. MUTTHURAJU, S/O. LATE MUTTHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT HUNASANAHALLI VILLAGE, KODAMBALI POST, VIRUPAKSHIPURA HOBLI, CHANNAPATNA TALUK - 562160 RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RITHISH D. NAIK, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. T.P. VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. DEEPAK N. S., S/O SHIVALINGAIAH, R/AT NAGOHALLI VILLAGE, KYLNCHA HOBLI, RAMANAGARA TALUK - 562 159. RAMANAGARA DISTRICT. Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36481 MFA No. 256 of 2025 2. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., R/AT NO 28, EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, M. G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. ASHOK N. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1- V/C/O DATED 05.08.2025) THIS MFA FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.04.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.612/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ADDITIONAL MACT, CHANNAPATNA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36481 MFA No. 256 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Rithish who represents Sri.T.P.Vivekananda, learned counsel on record for the appellant as well as Sri.Ashok.N.Patil, learned counsel for respondent No.2. At request of both the learned counsel, the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal. 2. Aggrieved by the sum that is awarded as compensation by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Channapatna through the award in MVC No.612/2019 dated 23.04.2024 the claimant therein is before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. As against the claim for Rs.20,00,000/- in total the Tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum of Rs.1,54,390/- as compensation. 3. Arguing on merits of the matter, learned counsel who represents the appellant submits that the appellant sustained grievous injury due to the road traffic accident and became permanently and completely disabled. Learned counsel states that though Pw.2 deposed that the disability in respect of whole body is 15%, the Tribunal took the disability in respect of - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36481 MFA No. 256 of 2025 whole body as 4% and awarded very meager sum as compensation under the head loss of future earnings. Learned counsel states that the compensation granted under other heads is also grossly low and therefore, the present appeal is filed. 4. Sri.Ashok.N.Patil, learned counsel for respondent No.2 though contends that the compensation granted is just and reasonable yet seeks to pass necessary orders in the light of the submission that is made by the learned counsel for the appellant making marginal enhancement. 5. It is not in dispute that the appellant sustained fracture of right fibula. As rightly contended the evidence of Pw.2 is that the disability in respect of whole body is 15%. However, the Tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 4%. Having considered the nature of injury sustained, this Court is of the view that the disability in respect of whole body can be taken as 8%. Learned counsel for the appellant also makes a submission that the appellant by doing agricultural work was earning Rs.20,000/- p.m. However, the Tribunal took the notional income as Rs.12,000/- p.m. Learned - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36481 MFA No. 256 of 2025 counsel contends that the accident occurred in the year 2019 and for the relevant period the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as Rs.14,000/- p.m. and atleast the said figure should have been considered by the Tribunal. This Court is of the view that the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant in respect of notional income to be taken is justifiable. Therefore, taking the notional income of the appellant as Rs.14,000/- p.m., applying appropriate multiplier '14' with taking permanent disability in respect of whole body is 8%, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to under the head 'loss of future earnings' is Rs.1,88,160/- (Rs.14,000X12X14X8%). 6. This Court is of the view that the appellant would have taken bed rest atleast for a period of 3 months. Therefore, 'loss of earnings during laid up period' comes to Rs.42,000/- (Rs.14,000X3). The Tribunal failed to grant any sum as compensation under the head loss of amenities in life. Having considered the nature of injury sustained and the disability, this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards 'loss of amenities in life'. Also this Court is - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36481 MFA No. 256 of 2025 of the view that the amount granted under the heads pain and suffering and towards food, extra nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges requires marginal enhancement. 7. Thus the compensation which the appellant is entitled to under each head is as under: Sl. No Description Amount 1 Compensation for pain and suffering Rs.25,000 2 Medical expenses Rs.4,750 3 Loss of future earnings Rs.1,88,160 4 Loss of income during laid up period Rs.42,000 5 Towards food, extra nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges Rs.30,000 6 Loss of amenities in life Rs.10,000 Total Rs.2,99,910 Rounded to Rs.3,00,000 8. Thus, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36481 MFA No. 256 of 2025 (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Channapatna through orders in MVC No.612/2019 dated 23.04.2024 is enhanced from Rs.1,54,390/- to Rs.3,00,000/-. (iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. However, the appellant is not entitled for any interest for the period of delay of 150 days on the enhanced sum as per orders in I.A.No.1/2025. (iv) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of 8(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/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE NS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28