- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22936 M.F.A. No.4368/2019 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.4368/2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT. RANI W/O BASAVARAJ SHETTY AGE 34 YEARS OCC:AGRICULTURAL COOLIE R/AT NO.96, MADIVALA STREET DODDAKADANUR POST HOLENARISIPURA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT 573211. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SURESH M. LATUR, ADV.,) AND: 1. SRI. RAJE GOWDA S/O BASAVE GOWDA R/AT: NO.40, C HONDALAHALLI VILLAGE HOLENARSIPURA TALUK HASSAN DISTRICT 573211. 2. THE MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NO.28/5 CENTENARY BUILDING, EAST WING M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU 560001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H.S. LINGARAJ, ADV., FOR R2 R1 SERVICE OF NOTICE IS D/W) Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22936 M.F.A. No.4368/2019 THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.10.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1145/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL SCJ & XXXII ACMM, MEMBER, MACT-3, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, 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 25.10.2018 passed in MVC.No.1145/2017 by the VII Additional Small Causes Judge and XXXII ACMM, Member, MACT-3, Bengaluru, (for short, ‘Tribunal’). 2. Sri.Suresh M.Latur, learned counsel for the appellant-injured submits that the appellant was aged about 32 years at the time of accident and was doing coolie work, but the Tribunal incorrectly assessed the income at Rs.7,500/- per month as well as disability at 40%. It is submitted that Dr.Ramesh K.T., Professor and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22936 M.F.A. No.4368/2019 HOD, Dept. of Plastic Surgery at Victoria Hospital, has clearly deposed that the appellant has sustained disability of 50% by considering the nature of injuries suffered by the appellant. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has awarded meager compensation under the other heads, hence he seeks to enhance the same appropriately by re- appreciating oral and documentary evidence. 3. Per contra, Sri.H.S.Lingaraj, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that insofar as income is concerned, the appellant has not produced any evidence and insofar as disability is concerned, PW2 doctor is not clear as to how he has assessed the disability at 50%. Hence considering the same, Tribunal has rightly assessed the disability at 35% and the same has to be retained. It is further submitted that award of compensation by the Tribunal under all other heads is just and proper and there - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22936 M.F.A. No.4368/2019 is no scope for enhancement. Hence, he 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-claimant as well as the respondent-Insurance Company are not in dispute with regard to the date of accident and liability to pay the compensation. It is to be noticed that the appellant, immediately after the accident, was taken to Holenarasipura Government Hospital and was then shifted to the hospital at Hassan, thereafter to NIMHANS Hospital, Bengaluru, and again to Victoria Hospital and PMSSY Hospital, Bengaluru. 6. Considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, it can be seen that the appellant was inpatient in the hospital for more than 50 days on different occasions. In order to prove the claim petition, the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22936 M.F.A. No.4368/2019 appellant examined herself as PW1 and Dr.Ramesh K.T. as PW2 and got marked Exs.P1 to P17. The respondent examined RW1 and got marked Ex.R1. The Tribunal considering the evidence, has awarded total compensation ₹7,30,275/- with interest at the rate of 8% per annum. It is to be noticed that the appellant has sustained following injuries as is evident from oral evidence of PW2 and wound certificate at Ex.P7, discharge summary at Ex.P9: "a) degloving injury on the scalp, burtholesgranulation absent over frontal region, b) grievous injuries to right hand and right leg, c) left ear lobe is half cut and d) other grievous injuries all over the body." 7. Taking note of the nature of injuries suffered and on re-appreciation of oral evidence of PW2, I am of the considered view that though PW2 is not sure with regard to the actual disability, however, he has assigned detailed reasons to arrive at such a conclusion. Considering the said evidence and keeping in mind the answers given in the cross examination, I am of the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22936 M.F.A. No.4368/2019 considered view that the interest of justice would be met if the disability of the appellant is assessed at 40% to the whole body. Admittedly, the income of the appellant is not proved before the Tribunal. Hence, the income of the appellant is notionally reassessed at ₹9,500/- per month by placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by KSLSA. Hence, the appellant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future income due to disability as under: Rs.9,500 X 12 X 16 X 40% = Rs.7,29,600/-. 8. Having re-assessed the income and disability and considering the nature of injuries suffered by the appellant and treatment provided, I am of the considered view that the compensation awarded under other heads is also required to be enhanced appropriately. Hence, the appellant would be entitled to compensation of Rs.75,000/- towards pain & suffering; Rs.57,000/- (Rs.9,500 X 6) towards the loss of income during laid-up - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22936 M.F.A. No.4368/2019 period and Rs.60,000/- towards loss of amenities in life. The compensation of Rs.63,775/- towards medical expenses and Rs.25,000/- towards food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges is unaltered. 9. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to modified compensation as under: Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.10,50,375/- as against Rs.7,30,275/- awarded by the Tribunal. 10. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following: HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Pain and suffering 75,000 Loss of income during laid-up period (Rs.9,500 x 6) 57,000 Loss of future income due to disability 7,29,600 Medical expenses 63,775 Food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges 25,000 Loss of amenities in life 60,000 Future medical expenses 40,000 Total 10,50,375 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:22936 M.F.A. No.4368/2019 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.10,50,375/- as against Rs.7,30,275/- 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. 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.: 31