- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20742 MFA No. 2518 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2518 OF 2025 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. U. NARASIMHAIAH S/O UGRAIAH NOW AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT JALADIGERE COLONY JALADIGERE, YEDIYURU HOBLI KUNIGAL TALUK TUMKURU DISTRICT - 572 130. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKARAIAH B, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S KMC GLASS PVT LTD., NO. 28/3, VISHWESHWARAPURA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK BENGALURU RURAL DISTRICT - 562 123. 2. TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., OFFICE: 2ND FLOOR, J.P AND DEVI JAMBUKESHWARA ARCADE NO.69, MILLERS ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 052 BY ITS MANAGER. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNA REDDY N.A, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 16.04.2026, NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20742 MFA No. 2518 of 2025 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.11.2023 PASSED IN MVC NO. 5073/2022 ON THE FILE OF THE XIV ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND ACMM AND MEMBER MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-10), 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 Heard the arguments of both sides. 2. This appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and award dated 02.11.2023 passed in MVC No.5073/2022 by the XIV Additional Small Causes Judge, ACMM and Member, MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-10) (for short, 'the Tribunal') seeking enhancement of compensation. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20742 MFA No. 2518 of 2025 3. The injured claimant met with an accident on 29.10.2021 and filed a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.25,00,000/-. The Tribunal, after considering the entire evidence on record granted an amount of Rs.3,82,390/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. 4. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has preferred this appeal, contending that he was an inpatient for a period of 19 days. He suffered grievous fracture injuries, but the Tribunal has awarded meager amounts under various heads. 5. It is further contended that the doctor assessed disability at 32% to the lower limb and 16% to the whole body, but the Tribunal has considered only 9%, which is on the lower side. Thus, he seeks enhancement of compensation. 6. Though it is stated that the appellant was working as a labourer earning Rs.20,000/- per month, no proof of income has been produced. As the accident - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20742 MFA No. 2518 of 2025 occurred in the year 2021, his notional income is taken at Rs.15,000/- per month as per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. He was aged 38 years at the time of the accident, and the appropriate multiplier is ‘15’. 7. The appellant produced Ex.P-6 is the wound certificate and Ex.P-8 is the discharge summary and examined the doctor as PW-2, who is an Orthopedic Surgeon. He stated that the petitioner sustained fracture of both bones of the right leg with a lacerated wound over the right knee and other injuries. The appellant was treated with internal fixation of the tibia. He complained of pain in the right leg and difficulty in squatting, climbing stairs, walking on slopes, kneeling, standing on the affected limb, and performing routine activities. On examination: The doctor found restriction of movement in the right ankle (plantar dorsiflexion 15°, normal 0–70°), difficulty in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20742 MFA No. 2518 of 2025 squatting, climbing stairs, walking on slopes, kneeling, and standing on the affected limb. An infected wound over the right leg was also noted. Radiological examination revealed that the fracture had united with implants in situ. 8. The doctor assessed permanent physical disability at 32% to the right lower limb and 16% to the whole body. He further stated that the appellant would require another surgery for removal of implants and control of infection. 9. In cross-examination, the doctor admitted that he was not the treating doctor. He stated that the tibia fracture had united, implants were in situ, there was no shortening of the limb, and only minimal restriction of movement was present. There was no loss of muscle power. As the appellant is relatively young, chances of recovery are better. 10. He further stated that there was no infection in the tibia and that the appellant can lead a normal life, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20742 MFA No. 2518 of 2025 though with some difficulty. The cost of removal of implants in their hospital would be approximately Rs.5,000/- to Rs.10,000/-. Therefore, this Court finds it reasonable to take the disability at one-third of 32% i.e., 11% to the whole body. Accordingly, the loss of future earning capacity comes to Rs.15,000/- × 12 × 15 × 11% = Rs.2,97,000/-. 11. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.68,990/- towards medical expenses and Rs.10,000/- towards future medical expenses, the said amounts are hereby confirmed. 12. The appellant was hospitalised for a period of 19 days. Considering the nature of injuries, period of hospitalisation and other relevant factors, this Court find it reasonable to grant Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities and Rs.40,000/- towards transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges. The appellant might not have done any other work at least for a period of three months. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20742 MFA No. 2518 of 2025 Therefore, Rs.45,000/-=(Rs.15,000/- x 3) is to be granted under the head loss of income during laid-up period. 13. Thus, the compensation awarded by this Court is as follows: 14. The appellant/claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.5,40,990/- as against Rs.3,82,390/- awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation works out to Rs.1,58,600/-. To this extent, the award passed by the Tribunal is modified. 15. In the result, pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part. Particulars Amount in Rs. Loss of future earning capacity 2,97,000.00 Pain and suffering 50,000.00 Loss of amenities 30,000.00 Transportation, extra nourishment and attendant charges 40,000.00 Medical expenses 68,990.00 Loss of income during laid up period 45,000.00 Future medical expenses 10,000.00 Total 5,40,990.00 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20742 MFA No. 2518 of 2025 ii. The judgment and award dated 02.11.2023 passed in MVC No.5073/2022 by the XIV Additional Small Causes Judge, ACMM and Member, MACT, Bengaluru (SCCH-10), is hereby modified; iii. The appellant-claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.1,58,600/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. iv. Respondent/Insurance Company has already deposited the awarded amount before the Tribunal. Therefore, Insurance Company is directed to deposit enhanced compensation of Rs.1,58,600/- with interest rate of 6% within one month from the date of this order. v. On such deposit, the appellant/claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount along with interest accrued on it. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:20742 MFA No. 2518 of 2025 vi. The appellant is not entitled for interest for 396 days delay period as per order in I.A.No.1/2025 dated 16.04.2026. Sd/- (P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE TMP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12