- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23611 MFA No. 3554 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3554 OF 2019(MV-I) BETWEEN: M/S. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., JP & DEVI JAMBUKESWAR ARCADE, NO.69, MILLERS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 051. REPRESENTED BY MANAGER. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAVI SHANKAR S SAMPRATHI., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. K.R.GOVINDARAJ, S/O RAMDAS K.T., AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, RESIDING AT KAGGERE VILLAGE, NAGGEHALLI HOBLI, ATTIHALLI POST, CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT. 2. SRI. NAVEEN H, S/O DR. B. HARISH, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.1851, 26TH MAIN ROAD, 40TH A CROSS ROAD, 9TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23611 MFA No. 3554 of 2019 BENGALURU - 560 069. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.Y.S.MURUGENDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R2 (ABSENT); R1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17/01/2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.1549/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE 4TH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, HASSAN DISTRICT (SIT AT CHANNARAYAPATNA), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.6,11,250/-, WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 9% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL JUDGMENT 1. This appeal is filed by the Insurance Company challenging the judgment and award dated 17.01.2019 passed in MVC No.1549/2017 by the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hassan, Sitting at Channarayapatna (for short 'the Tribunal'). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23611 MFA No. 3554 of 2019 2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant Sri Ravi S. Samprathi, submits that the Tribunal has committed a grave error in assessing the disability of the injured at 30% which would be contrary to the evidence of PW2. PW2 has assessed the disability to the extent of 31% and 23% to particular limbs as is observed by the Tribunal in Page 11 of the judgment. However, it has incorrectly assessed the disability at 30% and out of the total assessed disability, one third of it is considered to be 18%. Hence, he seeks to re-assess the disability at 18%. It is submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding interest at the rate of 9%. Hence, he seeks to reduce the interest to 6%. It is submitted that the Tribunal has recorded the finding with regard to the contributory negligence and the same is required to be affirmed in the absence of any appeal by the claimant. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal of the Insurance Company. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23611 MFA No. 3554 of 2019 3. There is no representation for the respondent No.1/claimant. Though served, there is no representation for respondent No. 2. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and meticulously perused the material on record. 5. The materials on record indicate that the claimant met with a road accident on 05.03.2017 and sustained grievous injury and fracture as is evident from the oral evidence of PW2, Wound certificate at Exhibit P8 and discharge summary at Exhibit P13, the following are the injuries: "Crush injury involving the left great toe and foot and fracture of right 2nd, 3rd metacarpal fracture with right trapezoid fracture." Respondent No.1/ claimant in order to prove the claim petition examined himself as PW1, got examined Dr. G. S. Satish as PW2 and got marked Exhibit P1 to Exhibit P30. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23611 MFA No. 3554 of 2019 6. A perusal of the wound certificate at Exhibit P8, discharge summary at Exhibit P9 and Disability Calculation Sheet at Exhibit P29 and oral evidence of PW2, it is to be noticed that the claimant met with the accident and suffered crush injuries referred supra. He was provided treatment. As per the oral evidence of PW2, he assessed the disability at 32% to the left lower limb and 23% physical disability to the right upper limb. Considering the said assessment, I am of the considered view that the said assessments are only with respect to the limbs. If both the disability opined by the Doctor is added, it would be 55%. Out of the total assessment of the disability, normally one third is required to be considered as a disability to the whole body. Instead of exactly considering one third as a disability, it would be appropriate to assess the disability at 20% by taking note of the injuries suffered and treatment provided. 7. This Court also cannot lose sight of the fact that the Tribunal assessed the income of the injured by considering - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23611 MFA No. 3554 of 2019 his avocation as a Milk Vendor at ₹10,000/- per month. Considering the Notional Income Chart prepared by the KSLSA, I am of the view that the income is required to be considered at ₹11,000/- per month in order to award just compensation. It is needless to observe that the finding of the Tribunal with regard to the contributory negligence is required to be affirmed in the absence of any appeal by the claimant. Hence, the compensation is reassessed in so far as 'loss of future earning capacity due to disability' is concerned and the same would be: ₹11,000 x12x15x20%= 3,96,000/- as against ₹5,40,000/-. 8. Insofar as the award of compensation by the Tribunal under the other heads is concerned, the same remain unaltered. 9. The Tribunal without assigning any special reasons awarded the interest at the rate of 9%. The same is reduced to the extent of 6% by considering the rate of interest paid by the Nationalized Bank on the Fixed Deposit. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23611 MFA No. 3554 of 2019 10. Thus, the claimant is entitled for the modified compensation as under: Heads Amount in rupees Pain and suffering 80,000/- Loss of future income and loss of future earning capacity ₹11,000 x12x15x20%= 3,96,000/- 3,96,000/- Medical expenses 45,000/- Permanent disability and other incidental heads viz., loss of amenities 1,00,000/- Attendant charges, food, diet, nourishment and transportation expenses etc., 50,000/- TOTAL 6,71,000/- Out of the compensation of ````6,71,000/-, if 25% i.e. `1,67,750 is deducted towards contributory negligence of the claimant, he is entitled for compensation of the `5,03,250/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 11. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23611 MFA No. 3554 of 2019 (ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 17.01.2019 passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.1549/2017 is modified to an extent that the claimant would be entitled to total compensation of `5 `5 `5 `5,03,250/-. (iii) The compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. (iv) Insurance Company shall deposit the compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. (v) The finding of the Tribunal with regard to contributory negligence of the claimant at 25% is affirmed. (vi) The rest of the judgment and award of the Tribunal with respect to apportionment, deposit and release shall remain unaltered. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:23611 MFA No. 3554 of 2019 (vii) The amount in deposit shall be transmitted back to the Tribunal. (viii) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE tsn* List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6