- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 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.6387 OF 2021 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI CHELUVEGOWDA S/O SRINIVAS AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, R/AT DODDAMALUR VILLAGE MALUR HOBLI CHANNAPATNA TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT …APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. RAJU S, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI KUMAR M S S/O SHIVASHANKAR K V MAJOR BY AGE R/AT NO.90 VISMAYA, 13TH CROSS 2ND MAIN, A BLOCK, J P NAGAR MYSURU - 570 008 2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., 1ST FLOOR, OPP: RVR COMPLEX BEHIND BUS STAND FLOOR RAMANAGARA -562 159 REPTD BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.S.KRISHNA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 03.04.2023, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by MADHUSHREE H Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO a) PASS AWARD, ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION/MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.10.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.303/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MACT, CHANNAPATNA; b) ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH COST THROUGHOUT; AND c) GRANT SUCH OTHER AND FURTHER RELIEF’S AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. 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 by the appellant/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded as per judgment and award dated 13.10.2021, passed in MVC No.303/2018, by the Senior Civil Judge And JMFC, Addl. MACT, at Channapatna (for short ‘Tribunal’) 2. The date of accident, involvement of vehicle, injuries sustained and liability to pay the compensation are not in dispute, the only dispute in - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 this appeal is in respect of inadequate compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 3. Heard Sri.Pradeep B. learned counsel appearing for Sri.Raju.S, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.B.S.Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.2 – insurance company. 4. Sri.Pradeep B., taking this Court through the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal would contend that the appellant, a 31 years young man, suffered injuries in the motor vehicle accident, due to the actionable negligence on the part of the respondent No.1 – driver of the offending vehicle, wherein he has suffered fracture of left femur bone. He was an inpatient for a period of 30 days from 20.04.2018 to 20.05.2018. He had underwent surgery for distal end femur with retrograde IMIL nailing. As - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 per the Doctor, PW-2, the appellant on clinical examination was suffering from difficulty in squatting and sitting cross legged and the disability was assessed at 40%, which would affect his normal day to day routine and come in the way of working as an agriculturist coolie. 5. He would further submit that the Tribunal has taken the income of the appellant at Rs.8,500/- p.m., whereas the accident occurred in the year 2018. As per the income under the chart fixed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (for short ‘KSLSA’) for the year 2018, is Rs.12,500/-. The Tribunal has failed to award appropriate compensation under all other heads, except medical expenses and sought to allow the appeal and modify the judgment and award and award suitable compensation by enhancing the compensation ordered by the Tribunal. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 6. Per contra, Sri.B.S.Krishna refuting the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in the absence of proof of income, the income taken by the Tribunal at Rs.8,500/- is proper and justifiable. The disability at 14% to the whole-body as against 40% to the particular limb and application of 17 multiplier by the Tribunal is just and proper. The compensation on other heads are adequately awarded by the Tribunal. As such, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal does not call for any interference and accordingly sought to dismiss the appeal. 7. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire appeal papers along with TCR, the only question which would fall for consideration is: “Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal befit within the expression of just - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 and proper compensation as held by the Hon’ble Apex Court under catena of cases, if not, whether interference of this Court is called for? 8. My answer to the above point for consideration is partly in affirmative for the following reasons: Admittedly, the accident had occurred on 20.04.2018, as per the chart, the income fixed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority for the year 2018 is Rs.12,500/-. The Tribunal has taken the income of the claimant Rs.8,500/- p.m., which is admittedly on the lower side. So far as the disability considered by the Tribunal in the absence of any challenge to the evidence of the doctor and the fact that the appellant being agriculturist coolie which requires constant standing and working in the field, the disability to the whole-body if considered at the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 rate of 20% would meet the ends of justice. So far as the compensation awarded under other heads when compared to the injuries suffered, treatment taken and the period of inpatient, all are on lower side which requires re-consideration and appropriate redetermination. 9. The claimant aged 31 years is suffering from difficulty in squatting and sitting cross legged and the disability was assessed at 40% so also had underwent surgery for distal end femur with retrograde IMIL nailing. However, the Tribunal has not awarded adequate compensation under the head ‘pain and suffering’. Hence, a sum of Rs.50,000/- is awarded towards ‘Pain and Sufferings’. 10. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,34,934/- towards ‘Medical Expenses’, which is as per medical bills and does not call for interference. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 11. So far as ‘Loss Of Future Amenities’ is concerned, the Tribunal has not awarded compensation. Hence, a sum of Rs.30,000/- is awarded under the said head. 12. Admittedly, the appellant-claimant was inpatient for a period of 30 days from 20.04.2018 to 20.05.2018 as per evidence before the Tribunal, which is not seriously disputed by the respondent. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/-, towards ‘Attendant Charges, Extra-Nourishment, Food And Conveyance Expenses’ which is on lower side and the same is enhanced by another sum of Rs.40,000/-, which would meet the ends of justice. 13. The claimant to substantiate the injuries and disability suffered has placed reliance on PW-2 - Doctor's evidence. PW-2, Doctor has been cross-examined by the respondent. However, nothing worthwhile has been extracted to dislodge his evidence. The Doctor has opined - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 the disability at 40% to the particular limb. The appellant claim that he is an agriculturist coolie. Considering the nature of injuries, avocation and the same is in respect of limb, the same is taken as 20% disability to the whole- body. 14. Claimant has not produced any income proof before the Tribunal. The accident is of the year 2018, as per Chart, the notional income fixed by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, is at Rs.12,500/- as against Rs.8,500/- taken by the Tribunal, as the same is on the lower side. The claimant was aged 31 years as on the date of the accident and the appropriate multiplier applicable is ‘17’. Therefore, the compensation under the head ‘Loss Of Future Income’ is recalculated and quantified as follows: Rs.12,500/- x 12 x 17 x 20% = Rs.5,10,000/- 15. In view of the accidental injuries, the claimant would have taken rest atleast for a period of 4 months. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 Therefore, by taking income at Rs.12,500/- per month and calculating the laid up period for 4 months, the claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rs.12,500 x 4 months), under the head ‘Loss Of Earning During Laid Up Period’, as against Rs.20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 16. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.30,000/- towards Future Medical Expenses, which is just and proper and does not call for interference. 17. In summary, the total compensation re- determined by this Court under various heads is as follows: 1. Pain and Sufferings : Rs. 50,000/- 2. Attendant Charges, Extra Nutritious food and conveyance expenses : Rs. 40,000/- 3. Medical Expenses : Rs. 1,34,934/- 4. Loss of Amenities : Rs. 30,000/- 5. Loss of Future Income : Rs. 5,10,000/- 6. Loss of earning during laid up : Rs. 50,000/- - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 period 7. Future Medical Expenses : Rs. 30,000/- TOTAL : Rs. 8,44,934/- 18. The total compensation re-determined by this Court works out to Rs.8,44,934/- as against Rs.4,47,694/- awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, the appellant – claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.3,97,240/- (Rs.8,44,934 - Rs.4,47,694) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. Respondent No.1 - Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of total compensation within Six Weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. 19. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i) The appeal is Allowed-In-Part; - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:28482 MFA No. 6387 of 2021 ii) The judgment and award dated 13.10.2021, passed in MVC No.303/2018, by the Senior Civil Judge And JMFC, Addl. MACT, at Channapatna is modified; iii) The appellant – claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.3,97,240/- (Rs.8,44,934 - Rs.4,47,694) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization. Insurance Company shall deposit the compensation stated supra before the concerned Tribunal within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. iv) Upon deposit, the entire amount along with interest shall be released in favour of the appellant upon proper identification. v) In the facts and circumstances no order as to costs. Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE JJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14