- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49429 MFA No. 176 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 176 OF 2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI JAGADISH AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS S/O KRISHNAPPA R/O SONNAHALLIPURA VILLAGE SULIBELE HOBLI, HOSAKOTE TALUK BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT, BANGALORE-562114 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NAGARAJA REDDY D., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD NO.L 143/144,CKN CHAMBERS I MAIN ROAD, SHESHADRIPURAM, BANGALORE-560020 REP BY ITS MANAGER. 2. SRI RAJESH S N AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS S/O NAGARAJA S C NO.94, SONNA HALLIPURA VILLAGE HASIGALA POST, HOSAKOTE TALUK, BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT-562 114 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.VIDYA RAO S., ADVOCATE FOR R1: R3 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.04.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.453/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL Digitally signed by ANNAPURNA G Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49429 MFA No. 176 of 2020 DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 25.04.2019 passed by the VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru (for short `Tribunal'), in MVC No.453/2014, seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. The brief facts of the case of the claimant are that, on 22.05.2014, he met with an accident due to rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-50-R-6503, on which, he was going as a pillion rider at Sonnahallipura. As a result, the claimant sustained multiple facial fractures and left III cranial nerve palsy as - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49429 MFA No. 176 of 2020 well as multiple abrasions over the face. He has spent substantial amount towards medical expenses. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he has suffered disability and loss of his earning capacity. With these reasons, the claimant has prayed for awarding of compensation. 4. The respondent No.1 was the insurer and respondent No.2 was the owner of the offending motorcycle. Respondent No.2 remained ex parte before the Tribunal. Respondent No.1 filed its written statement denying the contentions of the claim petitioner and also denied its liability to pay the compensation due to breach of terms and conditions of the policy of insurance. With these reasons, it prayed to dismiss the claim petition. 5. From the rival contentions of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues. 6. The claimant to prove his case examined himself as PW-1 and examined doctor as PW-2 and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49429 MFA No. 176 of 2020 marked 16 documents, as per Exs.P-1 to P-16. The respondent-Insurance Company has examined one witness as RW-1 and marked 2 documents as per Ex.R-1 and R-2. 7. The Tribunal after hearing both parties and appreciating the evidence on record, by the impugned judgment, held that the accident occurred due to negligence of rider of the motorcycle and awarded the following amount of compensation: Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain & Suffering 50,000 Medical Expenses 2,00,000 Loss of earning on the basis of disability 1,90,000 Loss of earning during laid up period 16,000 Loss of amenities and future unhappiness 15,000 Conveyance, attendant and nourishment charges 16,000 Future Medical Expenses 15,000 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49429 MFA No. 176 of 2020 Total 5,02,000 8. Being aggrieved by the said award passed by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed the present appeal for enhancement of compensation. 9. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the claimant as well as the insurer. 10. Learned counsel for the appellant/claimant contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate; The Tribunal has not considered the income of the claimant properly and the disability assessed is also on the lower side; The compensation awarded under other heads are also on the lower side. Hence, prayed for enhancement of the compensation. 11. Learned counsel for respondent No.1-insurer submitted that the Tribunal has properly considered the case of the claimant and has awarded a just and reasonable compensation, which does not call for any - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49429 MFA No. 176 of 2020 interference by this Court and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 12. Fact of the accident is not in dispute. The injuries sustained by the claimant in the said accident are also not in dispute. The Tribunal after appreciating the evidence on record, held that the accident occurred due to the negligence of rider of the motorcycle, which is not in dispute by either side. Hence, there is no need to reconsider the same. 13. The Tribunal, on re-appreciation of material available on record, in the impugned judgment, has taken the monthly income of the claimant at Rs.8,000/-, it is on lower side comparing to notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. 14. The claimant contended that he was earning Rs.20,000/- per month, but he was unable to prove the same. Following the notional income chart prepared by - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49429 MFA No. 176 of 2020 the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the income of the claimant is taken as Rs.8,500/- per month. 15. PW-2 has partly treated the claimant and assessed the disability at 62%. The claimant is suffering from left III cranial nerve palsy. PW-2 in his evidence has detailed and described the same and assessed the total disability at 62%. It appears that the disability calculated by him is incorrect. Considering the consequences of the said disability, the total functional disability of the claimant is assessed at 40% to the whole body. 16. The Tribunal has taken the age of the claimant as 51 years and applied the multiplier as ‘11’, which does not call for any interference. On the basis of the same, loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability is to be assessed at Rs.4,48,800/- (Rs.8500X12X11X40%). 17. Looking into the nature of the injuries and the treatment taken by the claimant, the amount of - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49429 MFA No. 176 of 2020 compensation awarded on some of the heads is on the lower side and requires enhancement. 18. For the aforesaid discussions, the claimant is entitled to following amount of compensation : Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and suffering 1,00,000 Medical expenses 2,00,000 Attendant expenses, special diet and conveyance charges 25,000 Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.8,500/- x 6months) 51,000 Loss of income due to permanent disability (Rs.8,500/- x 12 x 11 x 40%) 4,48,800 Loss of amenities 75,000 Future Medical Expenses 15,000 Total 9,14,800 Amount awarded by the Tribunal Enhancement- Rounded off - 5,02,000 4,12,800 4,13,000 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49429 MFA No. 176 of 2020 19. The Tribunal, at its discretion, awarded interest at 8% p.a. However, for the enhanced compensation, the claimant is entitled to interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation. 20. The Tribunal has held that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the said amount of compensation, which is not in dispute. Therefore, the respondents are liable to pay the same. 21. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. ii) The judgment and award dated dated 25.04.2019 passed by the VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru Rural District, Bengaluru, in MVC No.453/2014, stands modified. iii) The claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.4,13,000, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:49429 MFA No. 176 of 2020 its realization and the future medical expenses of Rs.15,000/- does not carry any interest. iv) The respondent No.1-Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award. v) The remaining portion of the award of the Tribunal shall remain unaltered. vi) Draw award accordingly. Registry is directed to send back the records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE HA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34