- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7704 MFA No. 1391 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1391 OF 2021(MV-I) BETWEEN: LAKSHMAPPA, S/O. LATE ERANNA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NELLAHALLI, MEDIGESHI HOBLI, MADHUGIRI TALUK-572 133. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SHANTHARAJ K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. VASANTHA, W/O. SANJEEVAMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT VYSYSRAPALYA, B. A. GUDI PALYA, HANUMANHTAPURA, KUVEMPUNAGARA, TUMAKURU-572103. Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7704 MFA No. 1391 of 2021 2. IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BY ITS MANAGER, MBAV MANSION, 1ST FLOOR, 3RD CROSS, M. G. ROAD, ABOVE UCO BANK, GENERAL KARIYAPPA, TUMAKURU-572101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; V/O. DATED 10.02.2026, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 14.08.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.809/2016 ON THE PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, MADHUGIRI, 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 DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7704 MFA No. 1391 of 2021 ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Shantaraj.K learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri.B.C.Shivanne Gowda learned counsel for respondent No.2. 2. Projecting that he is entitled to a higher sum as compensation, the claimant in MVC No.809/2016 that stood pending before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Madhugiri and was disposed of through order dated 14.08.2019, filed the present appeal. 3. The submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellant is threefold. Firstly, the disability in respect of whole body that is assessed by the Tribunal is unfair. Secondly, the notional income taken by the Tribunal is unjust. Thirdly, compensation granted under different heads by the Tribunal is on lower side. On the first point, learned counsel for the appellant contended that the disability that is assessed by PW2 in respect of whole body is 13.64% but the Tribunal took the disability - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7704 MFA No. 1391 of 2021 in respect of whole body as 13% only. On the second point, learned counsel contends that appellant as an agriculturalist was earning Rs.10,000/- per month by the date of accident. However, the Tribunal took the notional income as Rs.6,000/- per month only. Learned counsel states that the accident occurred in the year 2016 and for the relevant period, the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as Rs.9,500/- per month and at least said figure should have been considered by the Tribunal. On the third point, learned counsel states that appellant is entitled to additional sum under all heads. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 on the other hand states that the disability assessed by the Tribunal is proper. Learned counsel submits that in respect of notional income, the request of appellant may be considered. Learned counsel further states that so far as compensation granted under other heads is concerned, the same is reasonable. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7704 MFA No. 1391 of 2021 5. It is not in dispute that the appellant sustained Bimalleolar fracture of right ankle and underwent a surgery. The assessment of the Tribunal in respect of disability is proper and therefore, the same needs no interference. Appellant failed to produce any proof with regard to his occupation and earnings as on the date of accident. However, considering the submission that is made by learned counsel for the appellant, notional income is required to be taken as Rs.9,500/- per month. Having taken the notional income of appellant as Rs.9,500/- per month and without disturbing other parameters i.e., application of appropriate multiplier '14' and disability in respect of whole body as 13%, the compensation which appellant is entitled to receive towards loss of future earnings comes to Rs.2,07,480/- (9500x12x14x13%). Tribunal held that appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,31,040/- only under the said head. Thus, the enhancement will be Rs.76,440/- (Rs.2,07,480/- - Rs.1,31,040/-). - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7704 MFA No. 1391 of 2021 6. Admittedly, appellant took treatment as inpatient for a period of eight days. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the amount awarded towards compensation for nursing care, nourishment and other incidental expenses of Rs.4,500/- is on lower side. This Court is of the view that appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.5,000/- under the said head. The compensation granted under other heads is reasonable. Thus, the total sum which appellant is entitled to receive in addition to the sum that is awarded by the Tribunal is Rs.81,440/- (Rs.76,440/- + Rs.5,000/-). Therefore, the appeal is disposed of with the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Madhugiri through orders in MVC No.809/2016 dated 14.08.2019 is enhanced by Rs.81,440/-. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:7704 MFA No. 1391 of 2021 (iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. (iv) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. (v) On such deposit, appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE DS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1