- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22933 M.F.A. No.2686/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2686/2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: VIJAYAKUMAR .M S/O MALLIKARJUNA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/AT HEGGERE VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI TUMAKURU TALUK-572101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. K.S. SHANTHARAJ, ADV.,) AND: 1. MANJUNATHARAJA URS S/O DHANANJAYA RAJA URS AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS RESIDING AT HEGGERE VILLAGE BEHIND SIDHARTHA MEDICAL COLLEGE TUMAKURU-572101. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER JAYADEVA COMPLEX B H ROAD, TUMAKURU-572101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI, ADV., FOR R2 R1 SERVICE OF NOTICE IS D/W V/C/O DTD:11.08.2021) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22933 M.F.A. No.2686/2019 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.12.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.563/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AND MACT, TUMAKURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF 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/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 04.12.2018 passed in MVC.No.563/2017 by the VI Additional District & Sessions Judge and Member, AMACT, Tumakuru, (for short, ‘Tribunal’). 2. Sri.K.Shantharaj, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-claimant submits that the appellant sustained grievous injuries and fracture in a road accident dated 02.03.2017 and the appellant has examined PW2, however, PW2 has not tendered the evidence in consonance with the injuries suffered by PW1 and the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22933 M.F.A. No.2686/2019 treatment provided. It is submitted that PW2 has incorrectly assessed the disability of the appellant at 6% to the whole body. Therefore, he seeks to reassess the disability on the higher side by taking note of the injuries suffered. It is further submitted that the Tribunal assessed the income of the appellant at Rs.7,500/- per month which is contrary to Exs.P10 salary slip, P11 job removal letter and the income tax returns Exs.P14 to P18. The perusal of the income tax returns indicate that the income for particular years is more than Rs.5,00,000/- and Rs.2,68,000/-. Hence, considering the nature of avocation and the salary, he seeks to reassess the income of the appellant atleast at Rs.16,000/- per month. It is also submitted that award of compensation under all other heads is also on the lower side, hence, he seeks to reassess the same by considering the evidence on record by allowing the appeal. 3. Per contra, Sri.Ravish Benni, learned counsel for respondent-Insurance Company supports the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22933 M.F.A. No.2686/2019 impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the doctor himself has assessed the disability at 6% and this Court cannot increase the disability without any justifiable reasons. It is submitted that the income tax returns produced by the appellant is rightly disbelieved by the Tribunal and assessed the income at Rs.7,500/- per month and awarded just compensation. Hence, there is no scope for enhancement of compensation and seeks to dismiss the appeal. 4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing on both the sides and meticulously perused the material available on record. 5. The appellant-injured and the respondent- Insurance Company are not in dispute that the appellant met with a road accident on 02.03.2017 and sustained fracture of right femur tenderness and swelling, right MCL tear, right ACL tear, right patellar tendor tear with avulsion of tibial tuberosity as is evident from Ex.P4, the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22933 M.F.A. No.2686/2019 wound certificate. In order to prove the claim petition, the appellant-injured examined himself as PW1 and examined Dr.Mahesh Shekoba as PW2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P20. The respondent did not adduce any evidence. The perusal of the evidence of PW2, the doctor himself has assessed the disability at 6% to the whole body and considering the expert's opinion, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the disability at 6%. In my considered view, in the absence of any other evidence to reassess the disability, the disability at 6% is required to be affirmed. 6. Insofar as the income of the appellant-injured is concerned, the appellant has clearly deposed before the Tribunal that he was earning Rs.10,000/- per month from the private firm and also doing business. In order to prove the income he has produced Ex.P10 salary slip. The said salary slip indicates the income at Rs.9,000/- per month. In addition, the appellant has also produced Exs.P14 to P17, the income tax returns for the year 2015-16 to 2018- 19. The perusal of the income tax returns indicate that the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22933 M.F.A. No.2686/2019 income shown for the year 2017 is Rs.5,26,518/- and for the assessment year 2018-19, the gross total income is shown as Rs.2,68,212/-. It is to be noticed that the appellant has failed to produce the income tax returns of all the years preceding the accident. Hence, considering Exs.P10, P11 and P14 to P18 and considering the nature of employment and work after employment, I am of the considered view that ends of justice would be met if the income of the appellant is assessed at Rs.13,000/- per month. The appellant was aged about 27 years as on the date of accident, the appropriate multiplier would be 17, which has been rightly considered by the Tribunal. It is to be noticed that the appellant was inpatient for 33 days and underwent treatment for the aforesaid injuries. Hence, considering the nature of injuries, treatment provided and the oral and documentary evidence, I am of the view that the compensation under other heads is also required to be enhanced appropriately. Hence, the appellant is entitled to - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22933 M.F.A. No.2686/2019 compensation under the head of loss of future income due to disability as under: Rs.13,000 X 12 X 17 X 6% = Rs.1,59,120/-. 7. Further, the appellant would be entitled to compensation of Rs.52,000/- (Rs.13,000 X 4) towards the loss of income during laid-up period; Rs.50,000/- towards pain & suffering; Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities; Rs.35,000/- towards food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards medical expenses is unaltered. 8. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to modified compensation as under: HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Medical expenses 2,78,000 Loss of income during laid up period 52,000 Loss of future income due to disability 1,59,120 Pain and suffering 50,000 Loss of amenities 50,000 Food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges 35,000 Total 6,24,120 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22933 M.F.A. No.2686/2019 Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.6,24,120/- as against Rs.4,69,800/- awarded by the Tribunal. 9. 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.6,24,120/- as against Rs.4,69,800/- 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. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22933 M.F.A. No.2686/2019 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. e) The apportionment, deposit and disbursement shall be made as per award of the Tribunal. f) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29