- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23423 M.F.A. No.1350/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1350/2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: MUDALAGIRIYAPPA S/O LATE GOVINDAPPA AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS R/AT NARAYANAPURAPALYA SIRA TALUK, TUMKURU DISTRICT-572137. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. K. SHANTHARAJ, .,) AND: 1. KARIBASAPPA S/O SANJEEVAPPA AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS R/AT NAREBOMMANAHALLI RAMAGHATTA POST ARAPPANAHALLI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577168. 2. TATA AIG GEN. INS. CO., LTD., BY ITS MANAGER 2ND FLOOR, AP AND OC JAMBUKESHWARAR ARCADE NO.69, MILLER'S ROAD BENGALUR - 560052. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JANARDHANA REDDY, ADV., FOR R2 R1 SERVICE OF NOTICE IS D/W V.C.O. DTD:08.06.2023) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23423 M.F.A. No.1350/2019 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.11.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1656/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC, SIRA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the injured/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 15.11.2018 passed in MVC.No.1656/2014 by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC., and Additional MACT, Sira, (for short, ‘Tribunal’). 2. Sri.K.Shantharaj, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has committed grave error in awarding meager compensation of ₹50,000/- to the appellant. The Tribunal recorded the finding that the appellant complained pain in right hip, knee, leg and right eye and in order to prove the claim averments, he has examined himself as PW1 and examined Dr.B.M.Muralidhar - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23423 M.F.A. No.1350/2019 as PW2. However, the Tribunal has not considered any of the aspects and awarded meager compensation. It is submitted that PW2 has assessed the overall disability at 45%. Hence, he seeks to assess the disability appropriately and the income and also seeks to award compensation under the head of pain and suffering, loss of amenities and other conventional heads. 3. Per contra, Sri.Janardhana Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that Ex.P5 is the wound certificate which indicates only two simple injuries. However, the evidence of PW2 runs contrary to the same. It is submitted that even the disability certificate at Ex.P13 indicates that there is a tampering of the evidence as ink of the pen in writing the disability certificate is different. It is further submitted that insofar as injury to eye is concerned, the appellant met with a road accident in the year 2013 and material at Ex.P14 is provided to indicate that he has suffered injury - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23423 M.F.A. No.1350/2019 to eye and the said document is of the year 2017, hence there is no nexus with the medical records placed before the Court with the injuries. It is also submitted that PW1 has nowhere stated that in the road accident, he has sustained the injury to the eye and there cannot be any assessment of disability to the eye. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company and meticulously perused the material available on record. 5. The appellant-injured filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation for the injuries suffered by him in a road accident dated 31.08.2013. The material on record indicates that the appellant sustained lacerated wound as per Ex.P9 (wound certificate). However, the other documentary evidence placed on record including the medical records of Siddhartha - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23423 M.F.A. No.1350/2019 Hospital, Tumakuru, and oral evidence of PW2 and Ex.P13 are perused, it can be noticed that though the disability of the appellant is assessed at 30% by the doctor as is evident from Ex.P13, but in the oral evidence of PW2, he has assessed disability at 40%. In my considered view, there is a lot of discrepancy with regard to the assessment of disability between the oral evidence of PW2 and other medical evidence placed on record. Therefore, instead of remanding the matter back to the Tribunal, taking note of the injuries suffered and treatment provided to the appellant and considering his age as 68 years, I am of the considered view that the income of the appellant is required to be assessed notionally at ₹8,000/- per month placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by the KSLSA and disability at 10% for the purpose of determination of compensation. Hence, the appellant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future income due to disability as under: Rs.8,000 X 12 X 5 X 10% = Rs.48,000/-. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23423 M.F.A. No.1350/2019 6. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to modified compensation as under: Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.2,02,000/- as against Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. 7. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER a) Appeal is allowed in part. b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.2,02,000/- as HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Pain and sufferings 40,000 Loss of amenities 40,000 Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.8,000 x 4) 24,000 Miscellaneous expenses 20,000 Medical expenses 30,000 Loss of future income due to disability 48,000 Total 2,02,000 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23423 M.F.A. No.1350/2019 against Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment. d) The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. e) The entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant- claimant. f) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21