- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12527 MFA No. 9591 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.9591 OF 2018(MV-I) BETWEEN: SMT. JYOTI KUMAVAT, W/O. AJAY KUMAVAT, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.7, ANAND VIHAR B, WARD NO.2, NANGALAJAISA, BOHARA, JAIPUR. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. MOHAMMED SHERIFF, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE MANAGER, THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., T.P. HUB, KRUSHI BHAVAN BUILDING, 6TH FLOOR, HUDSON CIRCLE, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12527 MFA No. 9591 of 2018 2. MS. NEW MORNING STAR TRAVELS, MG. PARTNER, BY P. SRINIVASA RAO, PLOT NO. 233, 3RD PHASE, INDIRA AUTO NAGAR, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH STATE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 (VK NOT FILED); R2- NOTICE DISPENSED WITH, V/O. DATED 31.08.2024)) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.06.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.7572/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU [SCCH-14], PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12527 MFA No. 9591 of 2018 ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the injured/claimant seeking for higher compensation challenging the judgment and award dated 18.06.2018 passed in MVC No.7572/2016 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal' for short). 2. Heard Sri.Mohammed Shareef, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri.B.C.Shivanne Gowda, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in assessing the income of the injured at Rs.5,000/- per month. It is submitted that the injured is a home maker and the entire family was dependant on her services. Hence, her income is required to be assessed at least to Rs.15,000/- per month. It is submitted that the Tribunal further erred in assessing the disability of the injured at 17%, which is contrary to the oral and documentary evidence on record. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12527 MFA No. 9591 of 2018 Hence, he seeks to re-assess the disability at a minimum of 30%. It is further submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding meager compensation on all other conventional heads. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal by enhancing the compensation appropriately. 4. Sri.B.C.Shivanne Gowda, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-insurance company supports the judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the pleading on record indicates that the injured was a home maker. Hence, the Tribunal was fully justified in assessing the income at Rs.5,000/- per month and the disability at 17% which does not call for any modification. It is submitted that the award of compensation by the Tribunal on all other heads are also just and proper which does not call for any enhancement. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12527 MFA No. 9591 of 2018 respondent-insurance company and meticulously perused the material available on record. 6. The point that arises for consideration in this appeal is "whether the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal calls for any interference?" 7. The aforementioned point is answered in the 'affirmative' for the following reason: The records indicate that the appellant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation of Rs.15,00,000/- before the Tribunal. It is averred that the injured was aged about 25 years as on the date of accident and was a home maker and due to the accidental injury and disability she is unable to carry out the household activities. Hence, she sought for higher compensation. The Tribunal considering the oral testimony of PW.1-claimant has assessed the income at Rs.5,000/- per month. In my considered view the Tribunal has committed an error in assessing the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12527 MFA No. 9591 of 2018 income. It is not in dispute that the appellant has failed to produce any evidence to substantiate her income. In the absence of any proof of income, this Court normally places reliance on the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority and based on such chart, I re-assess the income of the injured at Rs.9,500/- per month. 8. The appellant in order to substantiate the injury and disability suffered by her in the road accident, has orally deposed before the Court and examined Pw.2 and also produced Ex.P1 to Ex.P13. The oral testimony of Pw.2 and medical records at Ex.P7, Ex.P9, Ex.P11 to Ex.P13 indicate that the appellant sustained injuries like wedge compression d12 vertebra (70% compression), surgery to compression L3 vertebra, D11 to L2 posterior stabilization with pedicle screws and rod, which is also evident from the oral testimony of Pw.2. Based on the documentary evidence, Pw.2 has assessed the disability of the injured at 25% to the whole body and 50% to the particular spine. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12527 MFA No. 9591 of 2018 Considering the same, Tribunal assessed the disability at 17%. In my considered view, the Tribunal has committed an error in assessing the disability at 17%. Taking note of the injuries suffered and surgery undergone by the injured-claimant, I am of the considered view that the disability is required to be re-assessed at 21% to the whole body for the purpose of determination of compensation. The Tribunal has also committed an error in awarding meager compensation under the other heads. 9. Hence, the compensation is re-assessed as under: Sl. No Description Amount 1 Loss of future income due to disability (Rs.9,500 x 12 x 18 x 21%) Rs.4,30,920 2 Pain and suffering Rs.45,000 3 Food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges Rs.15,000 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12527 MFA No. 9591 of 2018 4 Loss of amenities Rs.35,000 5 Loss of income during laid up period (Rs.9,500 x 3) Rs.28,500 Total Rs.5,54,420 10. In the result, the Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER (i) Appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the claimant would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.5,54,420/- as against Rs.2,73,600/- awarded by the Tribunal. (iii) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. (iv) Respondent No.1-insurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12527 MFA No. 9591 of 2018 interest before the Tribunal within a period of 6(six) weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. (v) The disbursement of the compensation and deposit shall be as per the Tribunal. (vi) Registry to transmit the records forthwith to the Tribunal. (vii) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE NS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24