- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:703 MFA No. 201515 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. JOSHI MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201515/2022(MV-I) BETWEEN: NARAYAN S/O BHOTU CHAWAN, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. CHONDI THANDA, TQ. & DIST. BIDAR-585 401. …APPELLANT (BY SRI SANTOSH BIRADAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. UDDESH S/O MALLIKARJUN, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO.38, CHAWLI ROAD, JAI BHEEM NAGAR, BIDAR-585 401. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, VEERBHADRESHWAR CHAMBERS, DOOR NO.8-10-135/1 AND 1A, OPP. NEHRU STADIUM, BIDAR-585 401. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAVI B. PATIL, ADV., FOR R1; SRI SANJAY M. JOSHI, ADV., R2) LUCYGRACE Digitally signed by LUCYGRACE Date: 2025.02.13 15:19:57 - 0800 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:703 MFA No. 201515 of 2022 THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND MODIFY THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.03.2021 PASSED BY THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, CJM AND ADDL. MACT, AT BIDAR, IN MVC NO.220/2019 AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR BY FIXING THE ENTIRE LIABILITY ON THE 2ND RESPONDENT - INSURANCE COMPANY. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.M. JOSHI ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C M JOSHI) 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned counsels appearing for the respondents. 2. This appeal is by the claimant against the judgment and award dated 03.03.2021 passed in MVC No.220/2019 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM and Additional M.A.C.T, Bidar, (for short ‘Tribunal’), seeking enhancement of compensation. 3. The factual matrix of the case is as below: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:703 MFA No. 201515 of 2022 a) On 12.05.2017 when the petitioner was traveling in an Auto Rickshaw bearing Reg. No.KA-38/6430, the driver drove the same in negligent manner and the vehicle turned turtle, resulting in the accident, wherein, the petitioner sustained fracture of proximal tibia on right leg with injuries to right thigh, right shoulder and clavicle right iliac, right thigh and feet, etc. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital, Bidar, and thereafter he has taken treatment at private hospital. A case came to be registered against the driver of Auto Rickshaw and charge-sheet was laid against him. The petitioner approached the Tribunal contending that he was an Agriculturist, aged about 52 years and had suffered permanent disability and therefore adequate compensation may be awarded to him. b) On being served with notice, respondent No.1 owner of the offending vehicle denied the claim contending that the claim is highly exorbitant, imaginary and untenable and that the vehicle was insured with respondent No.2, therefore, any liability be fastened upon respondent No.2. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:703 MFA No. 201515 of 2022 c) Respondent No.2-Insurance Company contended that the compensation claimed is exorbitant and that there was violation of the terms and conditions of the policy as the driver of the Auto Rickshaw was not having valid Driving License. d) The petitioner deposed as PW1 and Exs.P1 to P14 were marked. The treated Doctor was examined as PW2 on his behalf. No evidence was laid on behalf of the respondents. The Tribunal after hearing both sides came to the conclusion that the petitioner is entitled for compensation under the heads as below: Pain and sufferings Rs.20,000/- Medical Expenses, Attendant, Conveyance, Nourishing Food, and Other Incidental Expenses Rs.80,880/- Loss of Income During Laid-up Period Rs.14,000/- Loss of Future Income on Account of Permanent Disability Rs.90,720/- Loss of Amenities, life Comforts and Expectancy of Life Rs.10,000/- TOTAL Rs.2,15,600/- e) The Tribunal fastened liability on the owner of the vehicle, since the Driving License was not produced before it. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:703 MFA No. 201515 of 2022 Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the petitioner has approached this Court in appeal assailing quantum of compensation. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contends that the Tribunal has failed to assess the notional income of the petitioner-appellant in a proper manner and therefore, there should be re-assessment of the compensation. He also points out that the compensation awarded under remaining heads is also abysmally low and they need to be enhanced reasonably. He also pointed out that the appellant has filed an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC seeking production of copy of Driving License of the driver of the offending vehicle and as such, submits that the fastening of liability on the owner of the Auto Rickshaw is erroneous and the same needs to be rectified. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2-Insurance Company would submit that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is proper and correct and there is no need for enhancement of the same. It is - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:703 MFA No. 201515 of 2022 further pointed out that the Tribunal has considered the disability of 12% even though the PW2-Doctor had stated the physical disability at 25% and as such, no interference is required in the same. Regarding the application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC, the learned counsel fairly submits that if the Driver of the Auto Rickshaw had a valid Driving License, then the Insurance Company is ready to accept the liability. 6. A careful perusal of the application filed under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC would show that the petitioner has produced the web copy of Driving License of the Driver of offending vehicle and the print out of App of Government of India is also enclosed. Therefore, the document having been acceded by respondent No.2, the Application deserves to be allowed. 7. Coming to the assessment of the compensation, the petitioner was aged 60 years at the time of accident as observed by the Tribunal in Wound Certificate. He was an agricultural coolie and he had suffered fracture of right tibia, - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:703 MFA No. 201515 of 2022 for which, he had undergone surgery and had implants inserted. The Doctor-PW2 has stated that there is shortening of the leg by half inch and therefore, he opined that there is physical disability of 25% to the left leg. 8. Considering the age of the petitioner and the disability stated by PW2, the functional disability has to be re-determined by this Court. The Tribunal has determined the same at 12% and it appears that the age of the petitioner was not taken into consideration. Therefore, considering the age of the petitioner, the functional disability is considered by this Court at 15%. 9. The guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority (KSLSA) for settlement of the disputes before the Lok Adalat prescribe the notional income of Rs.10,250/- for the year 2017. In umpteen number of decisions, this Court has held that the guidelines issued by KSLSA are held to be acceptable on the ground that they are in general conformity with the minimum wages fixed under the Minimum Wages Act. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:703 MFA No. 201515 of 2022 Therefore, in the absence of any other proof of income, the notional income of the petitioner is accepted as Rs.10,250/- per month. 10. Thus, loss of future income is calculated as Rs.10,250/- x 12 x 15 x 9 = Rs.1,66,050/-, by adopting multiplier of ‘9’. Consequently, the compensation under the heads loss of income during laid up period of calculated at Rs.10,250/- x 3 = Rs.30,750/-. 11. The compensation under the head of pain and suffering being on the lower side, the same is enhanced to Rs.40,000/-. The compensation under the head of loss of amenities in life is also enhanced to Rs.25,000/- from Rs.10,000/-. The Tribunal has not awarded any specific compensation under the head attendant’s and incidental charges, but it merges the same with medical expenses. Therefore, the medical bills being worth more than Rs.76,000/-, the petitioner is also entitled for additional sum of Rs.15,000/- under these heads as he was inpatient for a period of 17 days. Therefore, in addition to the Rs.80,880/- - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:703 MFA No. 201515 of 2022 awarded by the Tribunal, a sum of Rs.15,000/- is awarded to the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.3,57,680/- under different heads as below: Sl. No. Heads Award by the Tribunal Award by this Court 1 Pain and sufferings Rs.20,000/- Rs.40,000 /- 2 Medical Expenses, Attendant, Conveyance, Nourishing Food, and Other Incidental Expenses Rs.80,880/- Rs.80,880/- + Rs.15,000/- 3 Loss of Income During Laid-up Period Rs.14,000/- Rs.30,750/- 4 Loss of Future Income on Account of Permanent Disability Rs.90,720/- Rs.1,66,050/- 5 Loss of Amenities, life Comforts and Expectancy of Life Rs.10,000/- Rs.25,000/- Rs.2,15,600/- Rs.3,57,680/- Less Award by the Tribunal Rs.2,15,600/- Total enhancement Rs.1,42,080/- 12. For the aforesaid reasons, the following: - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC-K:703 MFA No. 201515 of 2022 O R D E R i) The appeal is allowed in part. ii) The impugned judgment and award is hereby modified. The petitioner is entitled for a sum of Rs.1,42,080/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its deposit before the Tribunal, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. iii) Respondent No.2-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount with interest before the Tribunal, within a period of six weeks from today. iv) The order of the Tribunal regarding fixed deposit, release etc., remain unaltered. Sd/- (C.M. JOSHI) JUDGE SBS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46 CT: AK