- 1 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010257952021 NC: 2026:KHC:36769 MFA No. 4016 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JULY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4016 OF 2021 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. B.SIVA REDDY @ BADA SIVA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, S/O.SRI.BADA PEDDA GANGI REDDY, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT: HOUSE NO.823, 5TH 'A' MAIN, MES (MILITARY EMERGENCY SERVICES) ROAD, GOKULA POST, BENGALURU-560 054. PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT: HOUSE NO.3-82, BADAVANDLAPALLI, CHARUPALLE, NALLAMADA MANDAL, ANANTHAPURA, ANDHRA PRADESH - 515 501. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. R.LAKSHMANA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. IFFCO TOKIO GEN. INS. CO. LTD., NO.141, 5TH FLOOR, 'SHRI SHANTHI TOWERS', Digitally signed by PANKAJA S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010257952021 NC: 2026:KHC:36769 MFA No. 4016 of 2021 3RD MAIN, EAST OF NGEF LAYOUT, KASTURINAGAR, BENGALURU-560025. REP. BY ITS MANAGER. 2. MR. RAKESH YADAV S/O.SRI.AMARPAL, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, RESIDING AT: NO.51, 1ST FLOOR, ASHWATH NAGAR, BEHIND GOVERNMENT SCHOOL, RMV 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560 094. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R.SRINIVASA GOWDA, ADVOCATE; V/O/DATED 04.11.2012, NOTICE TO R-2 IS D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.02.2016 PASSED IN MVC.NO.4953/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXVIII ACMM, BENGALURU SCCH- 13. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010257952021 NC: 2026:KHC:36769 MFA No. 4016 of 2021 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K ORAL JUDGMENT The claimant being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded in MVC No.4953/2014 dated 15.02.2016 by the II Addl. Small Causes Judge and XXVIII ACMM and MACT (SCCH-13), Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') has filed this appeal. 2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. The factual matrix of the case is that, on 03.05.2014 at about 5.40 p.m., the claimant, while crossing B.B. Road near Hebbala Police Station Bus Stop, was hit by a motorcycle bearing Reg.No.HR-99- RK(TEMP)1694, which was allegedly ridden at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner. Due to the impact, he sustained grievous injuries and was shifted to Baptist Hospital, Bengaluru, where he underwent treatment. Due to the accident he sustained permanent - 4 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010257952021 NC: 2026:KHC:36769 MFA No. 4016 of 2021 disability. Accordingly, he filed a claim petition for claiming compensation for the injuries sustained in the accident. In order to substantiate his claim, the claimant examined himself as PW.1, the Doctor as PW.2, and his employer as PW.3, and produced 21 documents, which were marked as Exs.P.1 to P.21. On the other hand, the Insurance Company neither examined any witness nor produced any documentary evidence. 4. Upon appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition and granted a compensation of Rs.5,63,930/- with 6% interest. Being dissatisfied with the said compensation, the claimant is before this Court. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant- claimant and the learned counsel for the Insurance Company. - 5 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010257952021 NC: 2026:KHC:36769 MFA No. 4016 of 2021 6. Apart from urging several other contentions, the learned counsel for the claimant contended that the Tribunal grossly erred in not awarding any compensation under the head of 'loss of future income', despite the claimant having sustained six injuries in the accident and suffering permanent disability to the extent of 22.17% to the whole body, as assessed by PW.2, the Doctor. He further contended that the finding of the Tribunal that compensation towards 'loss of future income' could not be awarded on the ground that the claimant had failed to examine the a Orthopaedic Surgeon or the doctor who treated him, is unsustainable. He submitted that, if an opportunity is granted, the claimant would be in a position to examine the Orthopaedic Surgeon or the doctor who treated him and to produce the relevant medical records pertaining to the treatment undergone by him in support of his claim for compensation under the said head. Accordingly, he prays either to allow the appeal or to remit the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. - 6 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010257952021 NC: 2026:KHC:36769 MFA No. 4016 of 2021 7. The learned counsel for the Insurance Company contended that, upon a meticulous appreciation of the entire evidence on record, the Tribunal has rightly passed a reasoned judgment, which does not call for any interference by this Court. He further contended that, despite having been afforded sufficient opportunities, the claimant failed to examine either the treating Doctor or the Orthopaedic Surgeon. Learned counsel also submitted that there was an inordinate delay in filing the present appeal. Although this Court has condoned the delay by allowing the application filed in that regard, if this Court is inclined to remit the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration, the claimant should not be entitled to interest for the period of delay till the disposal of the claim petition. Accordingly, prays to dismiss the appeal. 8. I have given my anxious consideration both on the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the entire materials on record. - 7 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010257952021 NC: 2026:KHC:36769 MFA No. 4016 of 2021 9. As could be gathered from records, accident in question and the coverage of insurance policy to the offending motorcycle are not in dispute. In order to establish the nature of the injuries sustained and the disability sustained by the claimant, he examined himself as PW.1 and examined a Doctor as PW.2. It is true that PW.2 was not the treating Doctor. However, the wound certificate marked as Ex.P5, the discharge summaries marked as Exs.P7 and P8, along with the other medical records produced before the Tribunal, clearly disclose that the claimant sustained the following injuries: 1. Closed medial condyle (Hoffa's fracture) right femur 2. Closed fracture shaft of left fmur 3. Closed fracture left medial malleolus 4. Closed Gallezzi fracture left radius 5. SAH right side 6. Left frontal cortical haemorrhagic contusions 7. Pneumocephalus, diffuse cerebral oedema 8. Multiple facial bones fracture 9. Occulomotorpalsy R>L - 8 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010257952021 NC: 2026:KHC:36769 MFA No. 4016 of 2021 and PW.2 has assessed the permanent disability at 22.17% to the whole body. Despite such evidence, the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head of 'loss of future income'. 10. The learned counsel for the claimant also submitted that, if an opportunity is granted by remanding the matter back to the Tribunal, the claimant would be in a position to examine the treating Doctor, including the Orthopaedic Surgeon, and to produce the relevant medical records in support of his claim for permanent disability and consequential loss of future earning capacity. Having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and the question of functional disability, this Court finds considerable force in the said submission. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the claimant deserves to be afforded an opportunity to adduce the said evidence before the Tribunal. - 9 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010257952021 NC: 2026:KHC:36769 MFA No. 4016 of 2021 11. Under such circumstances, in my considered view, the matter needs re-consideration at the hands of Tribunal. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i. The appeal is allowed. ii. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.4953/2014 dated 15.02.2026 by the II Addl. Small Causes Judge and XXVIII ACMM and MACT (SCCH-13), Bengaluru is set aside. iii. Matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration. iv. Parties are at liberty to lead further evidence if any, and also to produce any documents. v. The Tribunal also at liberty to frame any additional issues if any, for adjudication of the claim. vi. The parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 17.08.2026 without further notice. - 10 - HC-KAR CNR: KAHC010257952021 NC: 2026:KHC:36769 MFA No. 4016 of 2021 vii. Since the accident is of the year 2014, the Tribunal is requested to dispose the same at the earliest, preferably with an outer limit of five months. viii. It is made clear that claimant-appellant is not entitled for any interest for the period from 16.05.2016 till disposal of the MVC before the Tribunal. ix. However, he is entitled for interest from the date of accident till 16.05.2016. SD/- (RAJESH RAI K) JUDGE GPG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 18