- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14398 M.F.A. No.4139/2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4139/2020 (MV-I) BETWEEN: NANDAKUMAR S.M. S/O LATE MARUTHIRAO AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS TAILOR R/O. SAKARAYAPATNA TOWN KADUR TALUK CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577135. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. RAVIKUMAR N.R. ADV.,) AND: 1. ZAMEERULLABAIG S/O SABJANBAIG AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS DRIVER R/O SAKRAYAPATNA TOWN KADUR TALUK CHIKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577135. 2. SAMEER KHAN .Y S/O YOUNUS KHAN AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS R/O KALMARDI MATA SAKRAYAPATNA TOWN KADUR TALUK CHIKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577135. Digitally signed by RUPA V Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14398 M.F.A. No.4139/2020 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., CHIKMAGALUR CHIKMAGALUR TOWN-577101. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MURALIDHAR N, ADV., FOR R3 R1 & R2 ARE SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED.17.03.2020, PASSED IN MVC NO.101/2019, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, MEMBER, MACT, CHIKKAMAGALURU, 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 ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the injured/claimant seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 17.03.2020 passed in MVC.No.101/2019 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Member, MACT, Chikkamagaluru, (for short, ‘Tribunal’). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14398 M.F.A. No.4139/2020 2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Sri.Ravikumar N.R., learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has committed a grave error in assessing the income of the claimant-injured at Rs.8,000/- per month and also assessed the disability at 24% to the whole body which is contrary to the evidence of CW2-Doctor, who has assessed the disability 71%. He submitted that the evidence of CW2 clearly indicates that the appellant is unable to carry out his routine work due to the disability. It is also submitted that the award of compensation by Tribunal on all other heads is also on the lower side. Hence, he seeks to enhance the compensation appropriately by allowing the appeal. 4. Per contra, Sri.Muralidhar N., learned counsel for the respondent No.3-Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal. It is - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14398 M.F.A. No.4139/2020 submitted that the appellant was aged about 60 years at the time of accident and failed to produce any evidence with regard to its income. It is further submitted that the assessment of disability by CW2-Doctor is to the particular limb and by considering the 1/3rd of the same, the Tribunal has assessed the disability at 24% which itself is on the higher side and award of compensation by the Tribunal on all other heads is also just and fair and does not call for any enhancement. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 5. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing on both the sides and meticulously perused the material available on record including the Tribunal records. 6. The only point that would arise for consideration in this appeal is : "Whether the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal calls for any interference?" - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14398 M.F.A. No.4139/2020 7. The material on record indicates that the appellant-claimant met with a road accident on 07.03.2016 and he was provided treatment at M.G.Hospital, Chikkamagaluru, and thereafter at Global Multi Specialty Hospital, Mangalore. The records indicate that the appellant was in-patient in the hospital from 08.03.2016 to 15.03.2016 and thereafter he has undergone the follow-up treatment. In order to prove the claim, the appellant-claimant examined himself as CW1 and got examined the Dr.Vijay B.T. as CW2 and got marked Exs.C1 to C15. The respondent did not adduce any evidence but with the consent he has got marked the insurance policy as Ex.R-1. The Tribunal, considering the evidence on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,55,000/- along with interest at 9% per annum. The perusal of the pleading indicate that the claimant-injured was working/doing tailor work and used to earn Rs.2,000/- per day, however, no evidence is produced to prove the income. In the absence of any evidence of income, this - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14398 M.F.A. No.4139/2020 Court re-assesses the income at Rs.9,500/- per month based on the notional income chart prepared by the KSLSA. The appellant was aged about 60 years as on the date of accident, the appropriate multiplier would be 9, which has been rightly considered by the Tribunal. The perusal of the oral testimony of CW2, who is not a treating doctor, but he has provided continuous treatment to the injured-appellant at a later point, based on the treatment provided to the injured-appellant and by considering the material on record, he assessed the disability of the injured at 71% to the right lower limb. The records also indicate that the appellant-claimant subsequently suffered paralysis attack and is unable to do any activity. Considering the said evidence on record, I am of the view that interest of justice would be met if the disability is assessed at 26% to the whole body for the purpose of determination of compensation. Hence, the appellant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future income due to disability as under: - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14398 M.F.A. No.4139/2020 Rs.9,500 X 12 X 9 X 26% = Rs.2,66,760/-. 8. Having reassessed the income and disability supra, taking note of the treatment provided to the appellant-claimant, I am of the considered view that the compensation awarded under other heads is also required to be re-assessed appropriately. Hence, the appellant would be entitled to compensation of Rs.45,000/- towards pain & suffering; Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities in life. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards other heads is unaltered. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to the modified compensation as under: HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Loss of future income due to disability 2,66,760 Pain & suffering 45,000 Medical expenses and hospital charges 30,000 Loss of income during laid up period 40,000 Food and nourishment 10,000 Conveyance charges 8,000 Attendant charges 9,000 - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14398 M.F.A. No.4139/2020 Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.4,38,760/- as against Rs.3,55,000/- 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.4,38,760/- as against Rs.3,55,000/- 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. Loss of amenities 30,000 Total 4,38,760 - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:14398 M.F.A. No.4139/2020 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 entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant- claimant. f) Registry shall transmit the records to the Tribunal forthwith. g) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29