- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12870 M.F.A. No.3364/2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3364/2019 (MV-I) BETWEEN: NISSAR AHAMED S/O IMAM SAB AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS OCC: BEEDI WORK, NOW NIL R/O MAHAVEER ROAD DODDAPETE, RANEBENNUR NOW AT 2ND CROSS, BASHA NAGAR DAVANGERE 577001. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. R. SHASHIDHARA, ADV.,) AND: 1. PARASHURAMAPPA S/O MAHALINGAPPA AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS DRIVER OF NKSRTC BUS BEARING NO.KA-35/F-13, BADGE NO:10648 HOSAPET DEPOT, HOSPET-583201. 2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR NEKRTC, GULBARGA (OWNER OF NEKRTC BUS BEARING NO.KA-35/F-13) PIN-583201. Digitally signed by ARSHIFA BAHAR KHANAM Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12870 M.F.A. No.3364/2019 3. THE CHAIRMAN KSRTC, INTERNAL SECURITY FUND SARIGE BHAVAN, SHANTHI NAGAR K.H.ROAD BANGALORE-560027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B.L. SANJEEV, ADV., FOR R2 R3 SERVED V/O/DTD:18.07.2024 NOTICE TO R1 D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:17.09.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.635/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND V ADDITIONAL MACT, DAVANAGERE, 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 17.09.2018 passed in MVC.No.635/2016 by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge & V Additional MACT, Davangere, (for short, ‘Tribunal’). - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12870 M.F.A. No.3364/2019 2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of the learned counsels for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal. 3. Sri.R.Shashidhara, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the disability at 7% which is contrary to the oral and the documentary evidence placed on record. It is submitted that the Tribunal has further erred in considering the age of the injured as 65 years, which is contrary to the medical records exhibited before the Tribunal. It is further submitted that the award of compensation by the Tribunal under all other heads is on the lower side and is required to be enhanced appropriately. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal. 4. Per contra, Sri.B.L.Sanjeev, learned counsel for respondent No.2-corporation supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the Tribunal has considered 1/3rd of the assessed income and assessed 7% as a disability which does not call for any modification. He submits that the appellant has failed to produce any documentary evidence with regard to the age of the claimant, hence - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12870 M.F.A. No.3364/2019 modification of the age in the appeal would not arise. It is further submitted that the award of compensation by the Tribunal is just and fair and does not call for any interference, hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal. 5. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing on both sides and meticulously perused the material available on record. 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?" 7. The parties to the proceeding do not dispute that in a road accident dated 30.01.2013 the appellant sustained injuries. The injuries sustained are extracted herein below: "1) Tenderness left partial region. 2) Tenderness left wrist joint. 3) Abrasion on the right wrist joint ½ x ½ cms. 4) Tenderness over left ankle joint Fracture 1/3rd radius left Fracture lateral mallenous left ankle with blunt injury head" - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12870 M.F.A. No.3364/2019 8. The aforesaid injuries indicate that the appellant has sustained two fractures and other injuries are simple in nature. Considering the same, PW2 has assessed the disability between 20 to 25%. Considering the oral testimony of PW2 and other medical records, this Court re-assesses the disability at 10%. 9. It is to be noticed that the Tribunal considering the age mentioned in the complaint, considered the age of the appellant as 65 years. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the said age is incorrect, as the complainant is a stranger and is not aware of the age of the appellant. It is submitted that in the discharge summary, the age is mentioned as 58 years and in disability certificate age is mentioned as 60 years. In view of the same, the age of the appellant is considered as 60 years as on the date of accident for the purpose of determining compensation, and the appropriate multiplier would be 9. Hence, the appellant is entitled to compensation under the head of loss of future earning due to disability as under: - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12870 M.F.A. No.3364/2019 Rs.9,000 X 12 X 9 X 10% = Rs.97,200/-. 10. Having re-assessed the disability at 10% and taking note of the fact that the treatment provided to the appellant is nearly 42 days which includes 15 days as in-patient. I am of the considered view that the compensation awarded under other heads is also required to be enhanced appropriately. 11. Hence, the appellant would be entitled to compensation of Rs.40,000/- towards pain and suffering; Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities, conveyance, food and nourishment and attendant charges. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards medical bills and loss of income during laid up period is unaltered. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to the modified compensation as under: HEADS AMOUNT (in Rs.) Pain & suffering 40,000 Medical bills 17,000 Loss of income during laid up period 27,000 Loss of future income due to disability 97,200 Loss of amenities, conveyance, food and nourishment and attendant charges 30,000 Total 2,11,200 - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12870 M.F.A. No.3364/2019 Thus, the appellant-claimant shall be entitled to total compensation of Rs.2,11,200/- as against Rs.1,41,920/- awarded by the Tribunal. 12. 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.2,11,200/- as against Rs.1,41,920/- 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 respondent No.2-Corporation 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. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:12870 M.F.A. No.3364/2019 e) The entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant-claimant. f) Draw modified award accordingly. Sd/- (VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL) JUDGE BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 25