- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 2816 OF 2024 (MV-I) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No. 4013 OF 2025 (MV-I) IN MFA No. 2816/2024 BETWEEN: 1. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, BAJAJ ALLAINZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., No.1977, PANCHAMANTRA ROAD, KUVEMPUNAGAR, MYSURU 570 023. …APPELLANT (BY SMT. RENUKA H. R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. NISAR I., S/O ISMAIL, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/O MUDDANAHALLI KOPPALU, MALANGI POST, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT 571107. Digitally signed by VINUTHA B S Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 2. SYED RAFIQ S/O SYED NAZEER, MAJOR R/O No.68, PANCHAKAVALLI ASHRAYA PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT 571 107. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI BASAVARAJ TIMMANNAVAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI H.V. BHANUPRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 R2 SERVED, UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.12.2023 PASSED IN MVC No.1527/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, MYSURU, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.22,23,105/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION. IN MFA No. 4013/2025 BETWEEN: 1. NISAR I., S/O ISMAIL, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/O MUDDANAHALLI KOPPALU, MALANGI POST, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT 571107. …APPELLANT (BY SRI BASAVARAJ TIMMANNAVAR, ADVOCATE FOR SRI H.V. BHANUPRAKASH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SYED RAFIQ, S/O SYED NAZEER, AGED MAJOR, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 R/O No.68, PANCHAKAVALLI ASHRAYA, PERIYAPATNA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT 571 107. (OWNER OF LORRY BEARING No.KA-02-B-7230). 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, BAJAJ ALLAINZ GIC LTD., No.1977, PANCHAMANTRA ROAD, KUVEMPUNAGAR, MYSURU 570 023. (INSURER OF LORRY BEARING No.KA-02-B-7230). …RESPONDENTS (SMT. RENUKA H. R., ADVOCATE FOR R2) NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.12.2023 PASSED IN MVC No.1527/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. V. ARAVIND) Heard Smt. H.R. Renuka, learned counsel for the Insurer and Sri Basavaraj Timmannavar, learned counsel appearing for Sri H.V. Bhanuprakash, learned counsel for the claimant. 2. The parties are referred to as per their ranks before the Tribunal. 3. These appeals are filed by the Insurer and the petitioner– claimant, respectively, challenging the judgment and award dated 04.12.2023 passed in MVC No.1527/2019 by the VII Additional District and Sessions Judge and Member, MACT, Mysuru (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’). 4. MFA No.2816/2024 is filed by the Insurer challenging the quantum of compensation as well as the involvement of the insured vehicle. MFA No.4013/2025 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 5. The brief facts of the case are that, on 11.06.2019, while the petitioner was proceeding on his motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-53- Q-3927, the driver of the lorry bearing Reg.No.KA-02-B-7230 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 (hereinafter referred to as the “offending vehicle”) dashed against him. As a result of the said accident, the petitioner sustained grievous injuries to his head, face, left leg, and other parts of the body. It is stated that the petitioner was admitted as an inpatient for a period of 20 days and underwent surgery. He is said to have sustained multiple injuries, including fractures, and to have incurred medical expenses amounting to Rs.17,00,000/-. 5.1 It is further pleaded that, at the time of the accident, the petitioner was aged 26 years and was working as a Supplier at New Sagar Hotel, Panchavalli, earning a monthly income of Rs.25,000/-. According to the petitioner, on account of the injuries sustained in the accident, he has suffered loss of earning capacity. 5.2 In response to the summons issued by the Tribunal, respondent No.1 – the owner of the offending vehicle remained absent and was placed ex parte. Respondent No.2 – the Insurer entered appearance and filed its statement of objections, denying the age, occupation, and income of the petitioner, as well as the involvement of the offending vehicle in the accident. It was specifically contended that the said vehicle has been falsely implicated. Respondent No.2 also denied that the accident occurred - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle. 5.3 The petitioner–claimant examined himself as PW.1 and examined two doctors as PWs.2 and 3. He got marked Exs.P.1 to P.213 in support of his case. On behalf of respondent No.2–Insurer, two witnesses were examined as RW.1 and RW.2, and Exs.R.1 to R.3 were marked. 6. Sri Basavaraj Timmannavar, learned counsel appearing for Sri H.V. Bhanuprakash, learned counsel for the claimant, submits that, in the accident, the claimant has suffered neurological disability resulting in functional disability to the whole body. It is contended that, having regard to the nature of injuries and the resultant loss of earning capacity, the disability ought to have been assessed at 100% for the purpose of determining compensation. 6.1 Learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in not awarding any addition towards ‘future prospects’. It is contended that, considering the age of the claimant as 26 years at the time of the accident, 40% of the assessed income ought to have been added towards 'future prospects'. It is - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 also submitted that the compensation awarded under various other heads is on the lower side and, therefore, seeks enhancement of the same. 6.2 Learned counsel further submits that, on the basis of the evidence available on record, the Tribunal has rightly held that the offending vehicle was duly insured as on the date of the accident. It is further submitted that the charge sheet filed by the jurisdictional police clearly establishes the involvement of the offending vehicle in the accident. 7. Smt. H.R. Renuka, learned counsel appearing for the Insurer, submits that there is no independent eyewitness to establish the involvement of the offending vehicle in the accident. 7.1 Learned counsel further contends that the assessment of disability is contrary to the medical evidence on record and that the percentage of disability determined by the Tribunal is excessive. It is submitted that the claimant, who examined himself as PW.1, has answered all questions put to him in the course of cross- examination, which, according to learned counsel, would indicate that he has not suffered any neurological disability. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 7.2 It is further submitted that, in any event, the whole body disability ought to have been assessed at one-third of the disability assessed by the Doctors. Learned counsel also contends that the witnesses cited in the charge sheet are interested witnesses and, therefore, the involvement of the offending vehicle in the accident is doubtful. 8. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 9. The Insurer has disputed the involvement of the offending vehicle in the accident and has alleged false implication of the said vehicle. We shall first consider the said contention. 9.1 Learned counsel for the Insurer vehemently contends that Ex.R.3, the Medico-Legal-Case (MLC) Register, does not disclose the registration number of the vehicle involved in the accident. In this regard, reliance is placed on the entry in the MLC Register, which reads as follows: “Patient was found lying on the side of the road with his scooter at 4.30 p.m. on 11.06.2019 in Panchavalli, near Hunsur.” Placing reliance on the said entry, it is contended that, when the petitioner was found lying on the roadside and in - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 the absence of any independent eyewitness, the involvement of the insured vehicle cannot be accepted. 9.2 The Tribunal, having considered this aspect, and upon appreciation of the evidence of PW.1, the FIR, and the charge sheet, has held that the offending lorry was involved in the accident. The aforesaid contention of the Insurer is advanced placing reliance on Ex.P.3. The jurisdictional Police, upon registering the FIR, conducted investigation and traced the lorry alleged to have been involved in the accident. Ex.P.8, the charge sheet, has been filed against the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle. The said charge sheet prima facie establishes the involvement of the vehicle in the accident. 9.3 Mere reliance on Ex.R.3, the MLC Register, cannot, in isolation, be made a basis to disbelieve the involvement of the offending vehicle. It is also pertinent to note that the charge sheet has not been contested by either the owner or the driver of the offending vehicle. Neither of them has disputed the involvement of the vehicle in the accident. In such circumstances, Ex.R.3 does not lend any substantial support to the case of the Insurer. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 9.4 Further, the fact that the victim was found lying on the roadside with grievous injuries, by itself, cannot be a ground to discard the contents of Ex.P.8 – the charge sheet. It is also relevant to note that the Insurer has not examined either the charge sheeted driver or the owner of the offending vehicle to substantiate its plea of non-involvement of the vehicle. 9.5 In light of the aforesaid discussion, we find no infirmity in the conclusion reached by the Tribunal holding that the offending vehicle was involved in the accident. 10. Insofar as the percentage of disability assessed by the Tribunal is concerned, we find some substance in the contentions urged by the learned counsel for the Insurer. 10.1 The claimant has examined himself as PW.1. In his affidavit filed in lieu of examination-in-chief, he has narrated the manner of the accident and the course of treatment undergone by him. He has specifically deposed that he is unable to carry on his work as he did prior to the accident. 10.2 The Consultant - Neuro-Surgeon has been examined as PW.2. He has spoken to the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 and the treatment administered. He has also referred to certain complications and complaints reported by the claimant. In the course of cross-examination, it is admitted that the percentage of disability assessed by him is based on the neurological report and the applicable guidelines. 10.3 PW.3, the Orthopedic Surgeon, has deposed with regard to the nature of orthopedic injuries and the treatment provided. However, he has admitted in his cross-examination that there are no supporting documents to substantiate the disability assessed at 78.5%. 10.4 The material on record undoubtedly indicates that the claimant has suffered both neurological and orthopedic disabilities on account of the accident. However, the method adopted by the Tribunal in taking one-third of each of the assessed disabilities, namely orthopedic and neurological, and thereafter aggregating the same, does not appear to be appropriate. 10.5 Having regard to the evidence on record, the nature of injuries sustained, and the extent to which the disability is likely to - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 affect the claimant’s avocation, we deem it appropriate to assess the functional disability at 35% to the whole body. 11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Erudhaya Priya vs. State Express Transport Corporation Ltd., [2020 SCC OnLine SC 601], has awarded addition towards ‘future prospects’ while assessing compensation, in a case where the permanent disability was assessed at 31.1%. As on the date of the accident, the petitioner was aged 26 years. The functional disability assessed by this Court is above 30%. Having regard to the age of the petitioner and the nature of disability, he would be entitled to addition of 40% of the assessed income towards ‘future prospects’. Accordingly, 40% of the assessed income is added towards future prospects for the purpose of computation of compensation. Rs.14,000 + (40% of 14,000) = Rs.19,600/- Rs.19,600 x 12 x 16 x 35% = 13,17,120/- 12. The material on record indicates that the petitioner was treated as an inpatient for nearly 30 days on two different occasions and has undergone surgical intervention. In that view of - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 the matter, the compensation of Rs.30,000/- awarded towards ‘pain and suffering’ appears to be on the lower side. 12.1 Similarly, the compensation awarded under the head ‘loss of amenities’ is also inadequate, having regard to the nature of injuries sustained, the extent of disability suffered, and the prolonged treatment undergone by the petitioner. Accordingly, we deem it appropriate to enhance the compensation to Rs.50,000/- each under the heads of ‘pain and suffering’ and ‘loss of amenities’. 12.2 The material on record discloses that the petitioner was treated as an inpatient for nearly 30 days. It is only reasonable to presume that he would have incurred expenses towards attendant charges during the period of hospitalization. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head of ‘attendant charges’. We deem it appropriate to award a sum of Rs.20,000/- under the said head. 12.3 The compensation awarded under the other heads is retained, except to the extent modified hereinabove. The age of the petitioner, his monthly income, and the multiplier applicable are - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 not in dispute. The findings recorded by the Tribunal on the said aspects remain undisturbed. 12.4 Accordingly, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is re- assessed as follows: Sl. No. Particulars Amount awarded by the Tribunal (in ₹) Enhancement (in ₹) 1 Towards medical expenses 6,83,985 6,83,985 2 Future medical expenses 80,000 80,000 3 Loss of future earning capacity 13,17,120 13,17,120 4 Laid up period 42,000 42,000 5 Pain and sufferings 30,000 50,000 6 Conveyance charges 20,000 20,000 7 Nourishment, dietary food 30,000 30,000 8 Loss of amenities 20,000 50,000 9 Attendant Charges - 20,000 TOTAL 22,23,105 22,93,105 Enhanced compensation Rs.70,000/- Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is re-assessed as Rs.22,93,105/- as against Rs.22,23,105/-. . - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:10026-DB MFA No. 2816 of 2024 C/W MFA No. 4013 of 2025 13. In the light of the above, the following; Order (i) Both the appeals are allowed-in-part. (ii) The judgment and award dated 04.12.2023 in MVC No.1527/2019 passed by the VII Additional District and Sessions Judge and Member, MACT, Mysuru, is modified by re-assessing the compensation at Rs.22,93,105/- as against Rs.22,23,105/-. (iii) The Insurer is directed to deposit the compensation within six weeks from the date of this order. (iv) The rate of interest, release and investment of the compensation is maintained. (V) Draw modified decree accordingly. Sd/- (S.G.PANDIT) JUDGE Sd/- (K. V. ARAVIND) JUDGE MV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 33