- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36538 MFA No. 3323 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. 3323 OF 2025 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI K BALAJI S/O C.K.SREENIVASALU, AGEDA BOUT 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.25-26, BANDLA VEEDHI, MARKET YARD, PALAMNER, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 517 408. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GURUDEVA PRASAD K.T., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. RAJU V S/O T.VEERANNA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS NO.210, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS, MALLATHAHALLI, VISHWAVIDYALAYA, Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36538 MFA No. 3323 of 2025 BENGALURU - 560 056. 2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., T. P.HUB, BY ITS MANGER, 6TH FLOOR, KRISHI BHAVAN, NRUPATHUNGA ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2 VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 15.09.2025, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.05.08.2024 PASSED IN MVC NO.607/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AND MACT, BENGALURU, (SCCH-2), 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:36538 MFA No. 3323 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri. Gurudev Prasad K.T learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri. Janardhan Reddy learned counsel for respondent No.2. At request of both the learned counsel the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal. 2. Challenge in this appeal is the award that is passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in M.V.C. No.607/2022 dated 05.08.2024. This is a claimant's appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant sustained fracture of right femur, fracture of right scapula and a head injury due to the accident. Learned counsel submits that the appellant underwent a surgery also during the course of treatment. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant is left with disability of 22% in respect of whole body and the same was established through the evidence of PW-2. The - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36538 MFA No. 3323 of 2025 tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 18% which is indeed justifiable. However, without considering the nature of injuries sustained, the tribunal granted meagre sum as compensation under the head pain and suffering and towards loss of income during laid up period and therefore the present appeal is filed. 4. The tribunal took the notional income of the appellant as Rs.15,000/- per month. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained this Court is of the view that the appellant would have taken bed rest atleast for a period of four months. However, the tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- only towards loss of income during laid up period. Also as rightly contended the sum granted as compensation under the head pain and suffering is also on lower side. 5. Sri. Janardhan Reddy learned counsel for respondent No.2 though contends that the compensation granted by the tribunal is highly justifiable, yet did not - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36538 MFA No. 3323 of 2025 dispute the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant regarding enhancement in compensation under the head pain and suffering and loss of income during laid up period. 6. Having considered the totality of evidence produced, this Court is of the view that globally the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.70,000/-. 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 Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru through orders in M.V.C. No.607/2022 dated 05.08.2024 is enhanced by Rs.70,000/-. iii. The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit except for the period of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36538 MFA No. 3323 of 2025 delay of 149 days as per orders in I.A No.1/2025. 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/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE VS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21 CT: BHK