- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29545 MFA No. 2612 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2612 OF 2017(MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. GURUSHARAN B.M., S/O B.P. MALLIKARJUNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING AT: 480, 9TH MAIN ROAD, I.T.I. LAYOUT, MALLATHAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 056. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. GURULINGAIAH T.R., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. SATHYANANDA, S/O BASAVEGOWDA, MAJOR, RESIDING AT NO.94, 2ND CROSS, JAYANTHA COLONY, NAGARABHAVI, BENGALURU - 560 072. 2. RELIANCE GENERAL, INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.25, EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR, CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 037. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C. LAKSHMINARAYANA, ADVOCATE FOR R2, VIDE ORDER DATED:26.10.2017 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) Digitally signed by REKHA R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29545 MFA No. 2612 of 2017 THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:02.08.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.3496/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDL. SCJ AND XIX ACMM MEMBER-MACT (SCCH-23) BANGALORE, 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 T.M.NADAF ORAL JUDGMENT Heard, Sri.Gurulingaiah T.R, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri. Mallikarjuna Reddy, learned counsel for Sri. C.Lakshminarayan, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with vide order dated 26.10.2017. 2. This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation arising out of judgment and award dated 02.08.2016 in MVC.No.3496/2015 passed by - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29545 MFA No. 2612 of 2017 XXI Add. SCJ and XIX ACMM, Member, MACT (SCCH-23) Bengaluru.1 3. The date of accident, involvement of vehicle, injuries suffered and liability to pay the compensation are not in dispute. The only dispute is with regard to quantum of compensation. 4. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 5. In the accident occurred on 03.05.2015 at about 10.30 p.m. The claimant had suffered grievous injuries i.e., obliquely placed surgically sutured wound present over medial aspect of left heel measuring 8 cms in length, with necrosis of skin, horizontally placed surgically sutured wound present measuring 12 cms in length, necrosis of skin present. 6. As per the Doctor, the claimant has suffered 25.7% of disability to the left lower limb. Accordingly, he 1 ‘Tribunal’ for short - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29545 MFA No. 2612 of 2017 has filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.10,00,000/-. Upon receipt of summons respondent No.1 remained absent and placed ex-parte. 7. Respondent No.2 appeared through his counsel and filed written statement denying all the allegations stated in the claim petition and has taken specific contention that the petition bad for non-joinder of necessary parties who are the owner/Insurer of KA-41-X-8301 which was involved in the accident. Further, taken contention that on the issuance to the insurance policy that, the same is not yet confirmed in respect of the vehicle involved in the accident and any liability is subject to the policy conditions, if any. Further, taken a specific contention on the provisions of Section 134(c) and 158(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and sought to dismiss the claim petition. 8. The Tribunal upon completion of pleadings framed three issues, out of which Issue No.1 is on rash - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29545 MFA No. 2612 of 2017 and negligent driving, which is answered in affirmative, on the ground that rider of motorcycle was riding the motor cycle in a rash and negligent manner. 9. The Tribunal has taken income at the rate of Rs.20,000/- p.m., and disability at 8.35%. However, considering that the claimant after he left his job in Wipro, where he was earning Rs.30,000/- p.m., and started private business and earning as such there is no proof of loss of earning and hence the Tribunal has not considered to award the compensation under the head loss of future income. The Tribunal upon consideration of materials placed on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,40,860/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realization. 10. Sri. Chandrashekar Reddy, learned counsel appearing for Sri. Gurulingaiah T.R, learned counsel for the appellant with all vehemence submits that the injury suffered is not disputed and the same has resulted in - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29545 MFA No. 2612 of 2017 disability. The Doctor has assessed disability at 25.7%. The Tribunal, though considered the same at 8.35%, however on the fact that the claimant was doing business after he left his job in Wipro declined to grant any compensation on the premise that there is no loss of future income, which is not sustainable in law, in the absence of any contra evidence by the Insurer that he is earning more amount in business. 11. Further, he submits that the medical expenses as per bills, comes to Rs.1,25,860/- the total amount of compensation awarded is Rs.2,40,684/-. As such, the same requires re-consideration under each head and sought to allow the appeal. 12. Sri. Mallikarjuna Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the Tribunal having considered the fact that the claimant left his job and started his own business and in the absence of any materials to show that he is suffering any loss in his - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29545 MFA No. 2612 of 2017 business due to the injuries suffered, awarded appropriate compensation which does not call for any interference. Accordingly, sought to dismiss the appeal. 13. Having considered the rival submissions this Court is of the considered opinion that in the teeth of Doctor evidence, and in the absence of any contra evidence placed by the Insurer to support its contention that there is no loss of income to the claimant and in view of disability certificate and the avocation of the claimant, the Tribunal has erred in not considering the case of the claimant for awarding appropriate compensation under the head loss of future income. This Court consider the disability at 10% and taken the income of Rs.20,000/- p.m., the claimant is entitled for loss of future earnings. The Tribunal has awarded inadequate compensation on other heads when compared to the injuries suffered and disability resulted and the same requires re-consideration. Accordingly, this Court finds force in the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29545 MFA No. 2612 of 2017 14. Accordingly, on re-determination the claimant is entitled for compensation under the following heads: Sl. No. Heads Compensation awarded by the Tribunal In Rs. By this Court In Rs. 1. Pain and Suffering 25,000-00 50,000-00 2. Loss of Income during laid up period 60,000-00 80,000-00 (20,000x4) 3. Loss of amenities 20,000-00 50,000-00 4. Medical expenses 1,25,860-00 1,25,860-00 5. Food conveyance and nourishment 10,000-00 15,000-00 6. Loss of future income - 3,84,000-00 (20,000x12x16x10%) TOTAL 2,40,860-00 7,04,860-00 15. On re-determination, the claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.7,04,860/- as against Rs.2,40,860/- and enhanced compensation would be Rs.4,64,000/- which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realization, except the delayed period of 114 days in filing this appeal, in terms of the order passed on application seeking condonation of delay. 16. For the foregoing reasons, this Court proceeds to pass the following: - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29545 MFA No. 2612 of 2017 ORDER i) The appeal is allowed-in-part. ii) The judgment and award dated 02.08.2016 in MVC.No.3496/2015 passed by XXI Addl. SCJ and XIX ACMM, Member, MACT (SCCH-23) Bengaluru, is hereby modified. iii) The appellant – claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.4,64,000/- (Rs.7,04,860 - Rs.2,40,860) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till realization, except the delayed period of 114 days in filing the appeal. iv) The Respondent No.2/Insurer shall deposit the entire enhanced compensation along with interest stated supra before the Tribunal within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29545 MFA No. 2612 of 2017 v) Upon deposit entire amount shall be released in favour of the claimant on proper identification. vi) The Registry shall return the trial Court record forthwith to the concerned Tribunal. Sd/- (T.M.NADAF) JUDGE PK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6 ct-vn