- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1936 OF 2024 (MV-I) BETWEEN: 1. LOKESHA S/O LATE VENKATASWAMY, NOW AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/A ALAKERE, KEREGODU HOBLI, MANDYA TALUK AND DISTRICT, NOW R/A C/O YADHUNANDAN, NEAR ARALIKATTE, K R SAGARA, S R PATNA TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAGHU R, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. JAVID PASHA MAJOR, S/O LATE BASU SAB, R/A NO 231/8, 14TH CROSS, 28TH MAIN, ARAKERE EXTENSION, BANGALORE 562163 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INS CO LTD., BALLAL CIRCLE, CHAMARAJAPURAM, MYSORE 570001 Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 COLLECTION OFFICER: NEAR CAUVERY GRAMEENA BANK, SRIRANGAPATNA 571438 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 23.04.2026, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV AC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.20.10.2022 PASSED IN MVC NO.701/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, SRIRANGAPATNA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the judgment and award dated 20.10.2022 passed in MVC No.701/2020 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Srirangapatna, seeking enhancement of compensation. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for respondent No.2/Insurance Company. The ranks of the parties are retained as before the Tribunal for the sake of convenience. 3. The petitioner/injured claimant met with an accident on 15.03.2020 and filed a claim petition before the Tribunal for compensation of Rs.21,80,000/-. The Tribunal considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.10,44,236/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of realization. 4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the claimant has preferred this appeal mainly contending that he was working as a driver and was having a driving licence under Ex.P9 and earning Rs.30,000/- per month. It is further contended that the doctor has assessed the disability of the left upper limb as 66% and that of the whole body as - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 22%, but the Tribunal erred in taking the disability as 22% instead of 100%. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant stated that the petitioner has sustained fracture dislocation of the left elbow and there are no movements and therefore, requested this Court to take the functional disability as 100%. He also requested to add the future prospects and filed Ex.P8 - photographs. He further stated that the amount granted under other heads are meager and thus, requested for enhancement of compensation. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2 stated that the Tribunal has rightly considered one-third of 66% ie., 22% as whole body disability and the same it is to be confirmed. 7. Though the petitioner stated that he was earning Rs.30,000/- per month, he has not filed any income proof. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 in the case of Sri. Venkatesh Vs. Sri. Ala Ravi and others, in MFA.No.4979/2021 dated 21.03.2024 wherein, it is held that, even in the absence of income proof, it cannot be possible for a petitioner to produce salary certificate or bank statement from an un-authorized sector to prove the same. Hence, the income of the petitioner was taken as Rs.18,000/- per month, considering that the petitioner was holding a driving licence. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 objected the same on the ground that mere filing of driving license is not sufficient to prove the income. Ex.P9 is the driving licence. It is for the petitioner to establish his income, but he failed to do so before the Tribunal. Mere filing of driving licence cannot be treated as proof of income, and thus, the Tribunal has rightly taken the income as Rs.15,500/- per month as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and this Court finds no reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The petitioner was aged 29 years and the relevant multiplier applicable is 17. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 8. The petitioner filed Ex.P5 and Ex.P6 - Wound certificates and also examined the doctor as CW.1, a Plastic Surgery Consultant and he stated that the petitioner has sustained the following injuries which are grievous in nature. i) Contaminated lacerated wound measuring 25 x 10 x 5 cm over the dorsum of the left elbow extending up to the distal one-third of the forearm, with exposed bone, bony tenderness over the left forearm and abnormal mobility of the left elbow. ii) Absence of sensation over the dorsum of the left hand. Digital X-ray of the left forearm and elbow revealed fracture dislocation of the left elbow. The petitioner underwent wound debridement and open reduction with external fixator application under left brachial plexus block. He also underwent external fixator realignment and radial head excision with wound debridement under left brachial plexus block. Further, he underwent wound debridement and skin grafting under IV - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 sedation and spinal anaesthasia. The petitioner was discharged from the hospital with advice for oral medications, splintage, physiotherapy and follow-up on OPD basis. On examination, the following were noted: i) Hypopigmented and hyperpigmented scars present posterolateral aspect of the left forearm (upper half), lateral elbow and multiple areas over the lateral aspect of the left arm. ii) Fixed flexion deformity of the left elbow. iii) Left wrist and fingers ROM grossly restricted. iv) Hypopigmented and hyperpigmented scar over the left thigh. The petitioner was advised topical and oral medications and orthopaedician's opinion. Maximum Muscle strength (MMT) of the petitioner is as follows: Shoulder - normal Elbow - 100% loss Wrist - 20% loss - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 The doctor observed that though the shoulder is normal, but there are no movements in the elbow and the loss is 100% to the elbow of the left upper limb and has finally assessed the permanent disability of the left upper limb as 66%. The Tribunal considered one-third of 66% ie., 22% as the disability. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as the petitioner is a driver and he cannot discharge his duties as a driver in view of the loss of movements in the elbow of the left upper limb, requested this Court to take the disability as 100%. However, the doctor has already assessed the said fact and arrived to the conclusion that there is disability of 66%. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly taken one-third of 66% ie., 22% as whole body disability and this Court finds no reason to interfere with the disability taken by the Tribunal. As the disability is more than 20%, the petitioner is entitled for future prospects as per the citation reported in MFA No.103807/2016 New India Assurance Company and Others Vs. Abdul S/o. Mehaboob - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 Tahasildar and others. The petitioner was aged 29 years and he is entitled for 40% towards future prospects. The loss of dependency comes to Rs.15,500/- + 40% x 12 x 17 x 22% = Rs.9,73,896/-. The Tribunal has already granted Rs.2,21,596/- towards medical expenses and the said amount is confirmed. The petitioner was admitted in the hospital for a period of 20 days. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalization, his occupation and other relevant factors, this Court finds it reasonable to grant an amount of Rs.75,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities and Rs.60,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The petitioner might not have done any other work atleast for a period of 5 months due to the injuries sustained in the accident. Therefore, Rs.77,500/- (Rs.15,500/- x 5) is to be granted under the head loss of income during laid up period. 9. Thus in all, compensation awarded by this Court is as below: - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 10. Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.14,57,992/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 11. In the result, the following order is passed: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. ii. The judgment and award dated 20.10.2022 passed in MVC No.701/2020 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Srirangapatna is modified. Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of future earning capacity 9,73,896 Pain and suffering 75,000 Medical expenses 2,21,596 Loss of amenities 50,000 Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 60,000 Loss of income during laid up period 77,500 Total 14,57,992 - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 iii. The claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.14,57,992/- along with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, instead of Rs.10,44,236/- granted by the Tribunal. iv. Respondent No.2/Insurance Company has already deposited the award amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, respondent No.2/Insurance Company is directed to deposit enhanced compensation of Rs.4,13,756/- along with interest at the rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order. v. On such deposit, petitioner is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on the same. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22292 MFA No. 1936 of 2024 vi. The claimant is not entitled for interest for the delay period of 391 days as per the order on I.A.No.1/2024 dated 23.04.2026. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE SHS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 7