- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15933 M.F.A. No.1994/2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1994/2018 (WC) BETWEEN: SRI. HARISH T.H. S/O HANUME GOWDA AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS R/O. THIMMANAHALLI VILLAGE KADALU POST, ALUR TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 213. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. ANURADHA N.G. ADV.,) AND: 1. SRI. HASSAIN SHARIFF S/O PEER SHARIFF MAJOR, R/O NO. 62, 7TH MAIN BTM LAYOUT, BENGALURU - 560 029. 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER SBI GENERAL INS. CO LTD., GROUND AND FIRST FLOOR RUKMINI TOWERS 3-1, PLATFORM ROAD/RAILWAY APPROACH ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU - 560 020 ISSUING OFFICE: THE MANAGER NATRAJ 101,201, 301 JUNCTION Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15933 M.F.A. No.1994/2018 OF WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY AND ANDHERI, KURLA ROAD ANDHERI (EAST) MUMBAI - 40006. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R2 R1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 30(1) OF W.C. ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:28.10.2017 PASSED IN ECA.NO.42/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XIX ACMM, MEMBER-MACT AND II ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND XXVIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, BENGALURU(SCCH-13), ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR 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-employee challenging the judgment and award dated 28.10.2017 passed in E.C.A.No.42/2016 by the II Additional Judge and XXVIII Additional Small Cause Judge and the Motor - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15933 M.F.A. No.1994/2018 Accident Claims Tribunal at Bengaluru (SCCH-13) (for short, 'the Tribunal'). 2. Smt.Anuradha N.G., learned counsel appearing for the appellant-claimant submits that the present appeal is filed only to the limited extent of challenging the judgment and award of the Tribunal insofar as the assessment of the disability is concerned. The Tribunal, contrary to the evidence of PW-2 and the medical records, assessed the disability at 12% to the whole body and hence, she seeks to re-assess the same appropriately. 3. Per contra, Sri.B.Pradeep, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the Tribunal, taking note of the injuries suffered by the claimant and after considering the evidence, has rightly assessed the disability and has awarded just compensation which does not call for any interference. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15933 M.F.A. No.1994/2018 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. It is not in dispute that on 06.04.2015, the claimant met with an accident during the course of employment and has filed a claim petition. In order to substantiate the claim, the claimant examined himself as PW-1, another witness as PW-2 and produced the medical bills, prescription, discharge summary, CT scan reports, X- ray reports and other medical records before the Tribunal as Exs.P1 to P17. The respondents neither adduced any oral evidence nor produced any documentary evidence. It is to be noticed that PW-2, after examining the injured- claimant and taking note of the treatment provided to him, assessed the disability at 33% to the whole body. I am of the considered view that the Tribunal was not justified in assessing the disability of the claimant at 12% to the whole body. Hence, taking note of the expert's opinion - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15933 M.F.A. No.1994/2018 and considering the injuries suffered by the claimant, the disability of the claimant is assessed at 33% to the whole body. Having assessed the disability at 33%, the compensation towards loss of future income is re- determined as under: Rs.8000 x 60% = 4,800 x 201.66 x 33% = Rs.3,19,430/- 6. Insofar as the award of compensation towards medical bills at Rs.3,88,995/- by the Tribunal, the same is just and proper and remains unaltered. Thus, the claimant would be entitled to the total compensation of Rs.7,08,425/- as against Rs.5,05,151/- awarded by the Tribunal. 7. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER a) The appeal is allowed-in-part. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15933 M.F.A. No.1994/2018 b) The impugned judgment and award dated 28.10.2017 passed by the Tribunal in E.C.A.No.42/2016 is modified to an extent that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to the compensation of Rs.7,08,425/- as against Rs.5,05,151/- awarded by the Tribunal. c) The enhanced compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. d) The respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount to the claimant. e) The respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall deposit the enhanced 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. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:15933 M.F.A. No.1994/2018 f) The rest of the judgment and award of the Tribunal with respect to apportionment, deposit and release shall remain unaltered. g) Draw the modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE RV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21