- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15722 M.F.A. No.4483/2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4483/2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: JOJI MUNDEKAL AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS S/O M.C. PAULOSE C/O. JOJI GEORGE MUNDEKAL MUNDEKAL ESTATE, KALTHODU VILLAGE KUNDAPURA TALUK-576201. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. K. PRASANNA SHETTY, ADV.,) AND: 1. JEJO M. BERNODOSE AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS S/O JOYI M. BERNODOSE R/O MUTHOTTU HOUSE MUDRADI VILLAGE AND POST KARKALA TALUK-574102. 2. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., UDUPI DISTRICT REP. BY ITS MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADV., FOR R2 R1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15722 M.F.A. No.4483/2020 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.12.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.82/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, (SITTING AT KUNDAPURA) KUNDAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, 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 12.12.2018 passed in MVC.No.82/2014 by the Additional District and Additional MACT, Udupi (Sitting at Kundapura), Kundapura, (for short, ‘Tribunal’). 2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Sri.K.Prasanna Shetty, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-injured submits that the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15722 M.F.A. No.4483/2020 Tribunal has committed a grave error in assessing the income of the injured, so also, the age of the injured, as the medical records and the charge sheet papers indicate that the injured was aged about 45 years at the time of accident, however, the Tribunal considered his age as 51 years and applied incorrect multiplier. It is further submitted that the award of compensation by the Tribunal under all other heads is required to be re-assessed by considering the nature of disability suffered by the appellant-claimant. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal. 4. Per contra, Sri.D.Vijaya Kumar, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the appellant-claimant has failed to produce any proof of income. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income. It is submitted that insofar as the age of the appellant is concerned, the claimant ought to have produced birth certificate or AADHAAR card, driving licence or the school records to re-assess the age at 45 - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15722 M.F.A. No.4483/2020 years. In the absence of the same, there cannot be any challenge to the age assessed by the Tribunal. It is further admitted that Tribunal has rightly awarded compensation under all other heads, hence, there is no scope for enhancement of the compensation. 5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing on both the sides and meticulously perused the material available on record including the Tribunal records. 6. It is not in dispute that the appellant-claimant met with a road accident on 14.04.2013 and sustained following injuries, which is evident from Ex.P-3: 1. Amputation of Left ring and Middle fingers 2. Open Fracture distal phalyna of left Index finger 7. The appellant was hospitalized for a period of 4 days and was provided treatment. It is not in dispute that the appellant-claimant had not produced any proof of income before the Tribunal and hence, his income is re- - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15722 M.F.A. No.4483/2020 assessed notionally at Rs.8,000/- per month. The Tribunal has rightly considered the disability of the appellant- claimant at 7%. Insofar as the dispute with regard to the applicable multiplier is concerned, the Tribunal considered the age of the injured-claimant as 51 years based on the medical records. I have perused the wound certificate at Ex.P3, discharge summary at Ex.P6 and disability certificate at Ex.P7. The aforesaid documents clearly indicate that the injured was aged about 45 years. However, in addition, the charge sheet material also indicates that the injured was aged about 45 years as on the date of accident. In view of the aforesaid documentary evidence, the age of the injured-claimant is considered as 45 years and appropriate multiplier would be '14' for the purpose of determination of compensation. Hence, the appellant-claimant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future income due to disability as under: Rs.8,000 x 12 x 14 x 7% = Rs.94,080/-. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15722 M.F.A. No.4483/2020 8. Considering the oral and documentary evidence and taking note of the treatment provided to the appellant-claimant, I am of the considered view that the compensation is required to be re-assessed on other heads appropriately. Hence, appellant would be entitled to a compensation of Rs.16,000/- (Rs.8,000 x 2) towards loss of income during the laid up period; Rs.15,000/- towards conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges and Rs.40,000/- towards the loss of the amenities in life. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards injury, pain & sufferings and medical expenses is unaltered. 9. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to modified compensation as under: HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Injury, pain and sufferings 40,000 Medical expenses 13,505 Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.8,000 X 2) 16,000 Loss of future income due to disability 94,080 Conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges 15,000 Loss of amenities in life 40,000 Total 2,18,585 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15722 M.F.A. No.4483/2020 Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.2,18,585/- as against Rs.1,38,117/- awarded by the Tribunal. 10. 10. 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.2,18,585/- as against Rs.1,38,117/- 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. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15722 M.F.A. No.4483/2020 e) The enhanced compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant- claimant. f) Registry shall transmit the records to the Tribunal forthwith. g) Registry to draw the modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 20 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15722 M.F.A. No.4483/2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU [JOJI MUNDEKAL VS. JEJO M BERNODOSE AND ANOTHER] 10.04.2026 (VIDEO CONFERENCING / PHYSICAL HEARING) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL ORAL ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. A memo is filed for being spoken to, on the ground that the direction to pay the compensation amount and recover the same from the respondent No.1 is not forthcoming in the final order. Taking note of the judgment of the Tribunal and considering the arguments, the following portion shall be added to the operative portion of the order: "The respondent No.2-Insurance Company shall pay the compensation amount and recover the same from the respondent No.1-owner of the vehicle." - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15722 M.F.A. No.4483/2020 This order shall be read in conjunction with the judgment dated 16.03.2026. The Registry shall carry out the necessary corrections and issue the certified copy of the judgment. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2