- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28325 MFA No. 2268 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2268 OF 2021 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT. AMBIKA W/O. SRI. PUSHPANGADANA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, R/A NO.271/20, RAJA GOPALA NAGAR, PEENYA 2ND STAGE, BENGALURU - 560 058. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SOMASHEKARA.K.M., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NEW INDIA INS. CO. LTD., MOTOR CLAIMS T.P. HUB NO.9/2, MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS, M. G. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 043, POLICY NO.67230031170200000500 VALID FROM 25-04-2017 TO 24-04-2018. 2. SRI. P.S.MUKESH S/O. SRIDHARAN, MAJOR, R/A MANJUNATHA NILAYA, Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28325 MFA No. 2268 of 2021 NAGASANDRA COLONY ROAD, RUKMINI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 073. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.JAGADEESH G.S., ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O DTD: 17.06.2025 NOTICE TO R2 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.10.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.4442/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL SCJ AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT-3, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant/appellant seeking enhancement of compensation arising out of in MVC No.4442/2017 dated 04.10.2019 passed by the VII Addl. Judge and ACMM, Bengaluru (for short ‘Tribunal’). 2. The date of accident, involvement of vehicle, injuries suffered and the liability fastened on the insurance - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28325 MFA No. 2268 of 2021 company are not disputed; the only challenge is regarding the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 3. Heard Sri.Somashekara K.M., learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri. Jagadeesh G.S., learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1-Insurance Company. Perused the entire appeal papers. 4. Sri.Somashekara K.N., learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant aged 58 years as per exhibit P.1 sustained multiple injuries (i) Irregular bone deep laceration over the forehead (ii) Muscle deep laceration over right knee joint, measuring 2 x 2 cms. The Doctor examined as PW.4 referring to the wound certificate has opined that: Injury No.1 is grievous in nature and injury No.2 is simple in nature. As per the CT scan report submitted at Exs.P.22 to 25 and the evidence of PW.4 the appellant is suffering from mental functional disabilities and there is impaired memory loss. Accordingly, the doctor has stated global neurological disability at 59%. The Tribunal has failed to - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28325 MFA No. 2268 of 2021 consider his disability and award appropriate compensation under the heads, which are normally being awarded in any motor vehicle cases. The Tribunal has awarded a meager compensation of Rs.15,000/- under pain and sufferings, attendant charges, conveyance, loss of amenities and nutritious food in all Rs.10,000/-, except awarding the medical expenses as per the bill, insofar as under all the heads are very meager in nature, accordingly sought to allow the appeal, by enhancing compensation by suitable modification to the award passed by the Tribunal. 5. Refuting the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, Sri.Jagadesh G.S, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1-Insurance Company with all vehemence submitted that as per Ex.P.16 the appellant is running a small scale industry and she is taking care of it. In view of the same, there is no disability suffered and the doctor PW.4 is not a treated doctor. He has given his opinion only on the basis of report of the psychiatrist. In view of the same, the Tribunal has properly assessed the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28325 MFA No. 2268 of 2021 case and awarded appropriate compensation which does not call for any interference by this Court and sought to dismiss the appeal. 6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire appeal papers as well as the trial Court records, the only question that would arise for consideration is: "Whether the compensation awarded by the tribunal is adequate and just compensation?" 7. My answer to the above point for consideration is 'partly in affirmative' for the following reason: Admittedly, the accident had occurred on 30.05.2017 at about 12.45 p.m. the injury suffered is on the head. The doctor though not a treated doctor but a qualified medical practitioner in the subject of neurology, on the assessment of report has stated the disability at the rate - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28325 MFA No. 2268 of 2021 of 59% as global neurological disability. The doctor has stated that in view of the disability the appellant has suffered neurological problems such as impairment in logical thinking, inadequate memory, poor at reasoning and IQ of 51 which is in the range of moderately below average IQ. 8. The Tribunal only on the ground that the appellant appeared in the witness box and answered the question had discarded the entire evidence of PW.4 on the premises that he has not a treated doctor and not considered the case of the appellant for granting adequate compensation to befit the same in the expression ‘just compensation’. In view of the documents produced and the injuries suffered and appellant running a small scale industry, though, there may not be any disability as stated by the doctor, which seems to be little exaggerated. However, there is some disability which has impaired the normal activity of the appellant. In these circumstance a future global compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- is awarded, in - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28325 MFA No. 2268 of 2021 addition to the compensation awarded by the tribunal which shall carry an interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. 9. Accordingly, the points of consideration is answered partly in affirmative, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award passed by the VII Addl. Judge and ACMM, Bengaluru, dated 04.10.2019 in MVC.No.4442/2017 is hereby modified and the enhanced from Rs.1,43,675/- to Rs.2,93,675/- and the enhanced compensation would be Rs.1,50,000/- along with 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. iii. Respondent No.1-Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28325 MFA No. 2268 of 2021 amount of Rs.1,50,000/- along with interest of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization within 6 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. iv. On deposit the entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of appellant on proper identification. v. In the facts and circumstances, no order as to cost. Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE AMM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10