- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36622 MFA No. 5242 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5242 OF 2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. NAGARAJU T. A., S/O LATE SRI. T. H. ANJANACHAR, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.363, MATHRUSHREE NILAYA, MEENAKSHINAGAR, KAMAKSHIPALYA, BANGALORE – 560 079. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. UDAYA KUMAR R L., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. MALLIKARJUNA, NO.183, 17TH MAIN ROAD, 4TH CROSS, FF COLONY, LAGGERE, BANGALORE – 560 058. Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36622 MFA No. 5242 of 2020 2. M/S UNITED INDIAN INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.109, SSI AREA, 5TH BLOCK, RAJAJINAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 010. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. HARINI SHIVANAND, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 – SRI. MALLIKARJUNA - SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.03.2020 PASSED BY THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AND IX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND ACMM, (SCCH-7), BENGALURU, IN M.V.C. NO.3485/2016 AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION WITH COST AND INTEREST FROM THE RESPONDENTS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36622 MFA No. 5242 of 2020 ORAL JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC.No.3485/2016 dated 17.03.2020 by the IX Addl. Small causes Judge and ACMM, Member, MACT-7, Bengaluru, whereby the Tribunal had granted compensation of an amount of Rs.5,23,889/-, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation. The claim petition is filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- for the injuries sustained in the accident. 2. It is the case of the claimant that on 09.04.2016 at about 3.30 pm., the claimant along with his friends travelling in car from Tirupathi to Bangalore, when the said car reached near Ashoka Leyland Company, near Lakshmaiahkandriga village, on Bangalore-Chittor Main road, the driver of the car drove the same with high speed, dashed against the road side tree and due to impact, the claimant and other inmates of the car sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the accident with the help of public he was shifted to Government Hospital, Chittor, wherein he took first aid and then he was shifted to Columbia Asia Hospital, Bengaluru, wherein he was admitted as - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36622 MFA No. 5242 of 2020 an inpatient. Basing on the evidence, the Tribunal had awarded the compensation as per the table given below: Sl. No. Heads Rs. Compensation amount awarded 1. For pain and suffering, mental agony Rs. 50,000/- 2. Actual medical expenses Rs. 3,93,889/- 3. For special diet and conveyance Rs. 10,000/- 4. Loss of amenities Rs. 50,000/- 5. Future medical expenses Rs. 20,000/- Total Rs. 5,23,889/- 3. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that when the doctor had deposed that the disability is 30.05%, the Tribunal had failed to grant the compensation under the head of loss of future income. It is submitted that he is working with a chartered accountant and his salary is 20,000/- per month, just because the salary is from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/- is increased, that cannot be a ground for the Tribunal not to grant any amount under the head of loss of future income. It is submitted that 30.05% disability to the whole body is a considerable disability which would have a great impact on his future earnings, as he is in a private job there is no security to the said job and basing on that the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36622 MFA No. 5242 of 2020 Tribunal cannot deny the compensation under the said head. It is further submitted that considering the hip dislocation and the fracture and even under the head of pain and suffering also the amount that is awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable. It is submitted that the claimant was in hospital for 11 days and the Tribunal ought to have granted an amount of Rs.11,000/- towards attendant, nourishment and conveyance charges. Considering the 30.05% disability of the claimant, the Tribunal ought to have granted a reasonable amount towards the loss of amenities. It is further submitted that on all counts the compensation needs to be enhanced. 4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/ Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal had rightly not granted the compensation under the head of loss of future income. It is submitted that as per the evidence of the doctor the fractures are united and his salary is increased from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.25,000/-. When there is no future loss of income, the Tribunal had rightly not granted the amount under the said head. It is submitted that the doctor who has deposed is not a treated doctor. It is submitted that on all other heads, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36622 MFA No. 5242 of 2020 the compensation that is awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and no interference is called for. 5. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the material on record. Considering the grievous injuries to the hip, this Court under the head of pain and suffering is granting an amount Rs.60,000/-. Towards the medical expenses, the Tribunal had rightly granted the amount and no interference is called for. Coming to the attendant and nourishment charges, considering 11 days of hospitalization, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.11,000/-. As per the evidence of the doctor, the claimant had sustained 30.5% disability. Hence, under the head of loss of amenities, this court is granting an amount of Rs.70,000/-. Towards future medical expenses, the Tribunal had granted an amount of Rs.20,000/-. Considering that the accident had taken place in the year 2016, this Court is granting Rs.30,000/- towards future medical expenses. Then coming to the loss of future income, it is not that the claimant is in a secure job, he is working with a chartered accountant firm and just because his salary is increased from Rs.20,000/- to 25,000/-, that cannot be the reason for the Tribunal not to grant future loss of - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36622 MFA No. 5242 of 2020 income. Coming to the submission of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company that the doctor who has given the disability is not the treated doctor. This Court cannot consider those things and there is no appeal preferred by the Insurance Company. As per the doctor's evidence, the disability is 30.5% to the whole body will have a great impact on the future life of the claimant. In these circumstances, this Court is inclined to consider the loss of future income. The evidence shows that his income is Rs.20,000/- per month, as his age is 48 years, he is entitled for 25% future prospects, it comes to an amount of Rs.5,000/- i.e., Rs.25,000/-. Hence, this Court is granting an amount of (25,000X12X13X30.5/100) Rs.11,89,500/- towards loss of future income. 6. In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.Mekala vs. M. Malathi and Another1, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. 7. The claimant is therefore, entitled to the compensation under the following heads: 1 (2014) 11 SCC 178 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36622 MFA No. 5242 of 2020 Sl. No. Heads Rs. Compensation amount awarded by the Tribunal Compensation amount awarded by this Court 1. For pain and suffering, mental agony Rs. 50,000/- 60,000/- 2. Actual medical expenses Rs. 3,93,889/- 3,93,889/- 3. For special diet and conveyance Rs. 10,000/- 11,000/- 4. Loss of future income Rs. 00/- 11,89,500/- 5. Loss of amenities Rs. 50,000/- 70,000/- 6. Future medical expenses Rs. 20,000/- 30,000/- 7. Legal expenses Rs. 00/- 10,000/- Total Rs. 5,23,889/- 17,64,389/- Enhanced amount Rs. 12,40,500/- 8. Altogether, the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.17,64,389/-. 9. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimant is partly allowed by enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.5,23,889/- to Rs.17,64,389/-. i) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. ii) The apportionment of the amount shall be as per the order passed by the Trial Court. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:36622 MFA No. 5242 of 2020 iii) Respondent No.2-Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security. iv) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay. v) No costs. vi) Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE BN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 16